THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA 


BY 


HAN  LIANG  HUANG,  M.  A. 


SUBMITTED  IN  PARTIAL  FULFILMENT  OF  THE  REQUIREMENTS 

FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 

IN  THE 

FACULTY  OF  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


NEW  YORK 

1918 


EXCHANGE 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA 


BY 

HAN  LIANG  HUANG,  M.  A. 


SUBMITTED  IN  PARTIAL  FULFILMENT  OF  THE  REQUIREMENTS 

FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 

IN  THE 

FACULTY  OF  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


NEW  YORK 
1918 


COPYRIGHT,  1918 
BY 

THE  FACULTY  OF  POLITICAL  SCIENCE  OF 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY,  NEW  YORK 


to 

CAROLYN  KNOWLAND  HYDE 

WHO  HAS  BEEN  A  MOTHER  TO  ME  DURING  MY  RESIDENCE  IN  AMERICA 

AND  WHOSE  LOVE  AND  SYMPATHY  FOR  CHINA  HAVE  ENDEARED 

HER  TO  MANY  OF  MY  COUNTRYMEN,  THIS  MONOGRAPH 

IS  GRATEFULLY  DEDICATED 


383277 


PREFACE 

THE  purpose  of  this  work  is  twofold.  It  is  intended, 
first,  to  serve  as  a  basis  for  the  discussion  of  the  land  tax 
reform  which  is  now  one  of  the  foremost  fiscal  problems 
in  China  and,  secondly,  to  form  an  introduction  to  a  larger 
study  of  the  early  fiscal  system  of  the  country  in  which 
the  land  tax  has  played  such  an  eminent  role.  Chinese 
literature  contains  a  wealth  of  materials  on  fiscal  and  finan- 
cial subjects,  covering  a  period  of  no  less  than  four  thousand 
years.  Most  of  the  facts  are,  however,  recorded  merely 
chronologically  and  little  attempt  has  yet  been  made  to  sys- 
tematize or  to  interpret  them  by  showing  their  relations 
and  mutual  significance.  With  the  help  of  modern  scien- 
tific methods  of  investigation  a  fruitful  study  could  be 
made  of  the  early  tax  systems  of  China.  It  is  hoped  that 
this  work  may  furnish  a  preliminary  survey  and  lead  to  a 
further  inquiry  into  this  practically  unexploited  field  of 
public  finance. 

Besides  its  historical  interest,  the  land  tax  is  now  one  of 
the  most  pressing  problems  before  the  Chinese  government. 
From  the  earliest  time  until  comparatively  recent  days  it 
has  been  China's  main  source  of  revenue.  But  the  system 
has  outgrown  itself.  It  is  at  present,  as  will  be  unfolded 
in  the  following  pages,  in  a  very  chaotic  state.  Its  theory 
as  well  as  its  methods  of  administration  is  antiquated,  and, 
in  many  essentials,  at  variance  with  the  modern  principles 
of  taxation.  There  is  perhaps  no  single  measure  which 
the  Republic  of  China  can  adopt  to  vindicate  its  earnest 
attempt  to  establish  a  democratic  and  efficient  government 
275]  7 


• 

8  PREFACE  [276 

more  effectively  than  to  put  on  an  enduring  basis  this  tax 
which  touches  the  economic  life  of  the  masses  more  closely 
than  any  other  expression  of  the  governing  power. 

There  is  another  consideration  which  makes  the  reform  of 
the  land  tax  imperative.  Those  who  are  familiar  with  the 
present  financial  situation  of  China  know  that  two  out  of 
her  three  largest  sources  of  revenue  will  be  unavailable  for 
many  years  to  come.  These  three  sources  are  the  custom 
duties,  the  salt  gabelle,  and  the  land  tax,  which  together 
furnish  nearly  two-thirds  of  the  total  revenue.  The  tariff 
has  been  limited,  however,  by  treaty  agreements  with 
foreign  powers  to  five  per  cent  ad  valorem  and  its  receipts, 
thus  limited,  have  been  hypothecated  to  the  payments  of 
the  Boxer  Indemnity  which  will  not  expire  until  1940. 
The  salt  gabelle,  the  fiscal  success  of  which  has  been  most 
remarkable  since  its  reorganization,  will  be  largely  absorbed 
by  the  payments  of  interest  and  amortization  of  the  loan 
services  to  which  it  is  pledged.  This  situation  is  responsible 
for  a  large  part  of  the  present  financial  embarrassments. 
Perhaps  some  immediate  relief  may  be  expected  from  the 
revision  of  the  tariff  to  an  effective  five  per  cent  basis.  But 
such  an  increase  will  necessarily  be  limited.  It  is  for  these 
reasons  that  many  students  of  the  financial  situation  in 
China  have  pointed  to  the  reform  of  the  land  tax  as  a  key 
to  the  solution  of  the  present  financial  difficulties  of  the 
country. 

As  a  source  of  revenue  the  land  tax  in  China,  as  will  be 
shown  later  in  the  discussion,  has  great  possibilities. 
Through  a  proper  reorganization  of  the  system  of  admin- 
istration its  yield  can  be  greatly  augmented  without  neces- 
sarily increasing  the  burden  of  the  people.  The  task  of 
reform  is,  however,  a  difficult  one,  and  how  it  can  be  accom- 
plished is  a  subject  that  has  been  widely  discussed.  It  is 
the  hope  of  the  writer  that  the  present  study  may  contribute 


PREFACE  9 

something  toward  the  solution  of  this  problem.  We  shall 
attempt  in  this  monograph  to  trace  the  development  of  the 
tax,  to  analyze  its  existing  conditions,  to  show  how  these 
conditions  were  brought  about,  and  to  discuss  some  of  the 
fundamental  problems  which  must  be  solved  before  any 
thoroughgoing  reform  can  be  effected. 

The  writer  is  indebted  to  several  professors  in  the  De- 
partment of  Economics.  He  wishes  to  express  his  grati- 
tude especially  to  Professor  Edwin  R.  A.  Seligman,  under 
whom  he  has  studied  for  three  years,  for  his  inspiring  en- 
couragement and  guidance  throughout  the  entire  period 
and  for  his  reading  of  the  manuscript.  The  writer  is  also 
deeply  indebted  to  Professor  Robert  M.  Haig  who  went  over 
the  entire  manuscript  and  made  many  helpful  suggestions, 
and  to  Professor  Henry  A.  E.  Chandler  who  read  the 
galley  proof  and  suggested  many  improvements.  Acknowl- 
edgments are  also  due  to  Professor  Jeremiah  W.  Jenks  of 
New  York  University,  Director  of  the  Far  Eastern  Bureau, 
in  which  the  writer  has  worked  for  more  than  a  year,  for 
suggesting  the  subject  of  this  dissertation,  as  well  as  to  Miss 
Luella  DeLamarter  of  the  same  Bureau  for  her  assistance 
in  preparing  the  manuscript  for  the  press. 

H.  L.  HUANG. 

COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY,  APRIL,  1918. 


CONTENTS 


PART  I 
THE  LAND  TAX  PRIOR  TO  THE  TSING  DYNASTY 

CHAPTER  I 
THE  LAND  TAX  IN  ANTIQUITY 

Feudal  Period  and  the  Period  of  Private  Property— The  Earliest 
Land  Tax  in  China— The  Tribute  System  of  the  Hsia  Dynasty 
—Its  Methods  of  Administration— The  Tsing  Tien  System  of  the 
Shang  Dynasty — The  Tsing  Tien  System  Compared  with  the 
Tribute  System  as  a  System  of  Taxation— Further  Development 
of  the  Tsing  Tien  System  under  the  Chow  Dynasty — Units  of 
Land  Measurement  in  the  Chow  Dynasty — Classification  and 
Distribution  of  Land  under  the  Chow  Dynasty — Progressive  Tax- 
ation of  Large  Land-holdings  under  Chow— The  System  of  Tax- 
ation of  the  Three  Dynasties  Compared — Development  of  the 
Concept  of  Taxation 19 

CHAPTER  II 
THE  LAND  TAX  FROM  THE  CH'IN  DYNASTY  TO  THE  Sui  DYNASTY 

Political  and  Economic  Transformation  in  the  Latter  Part  of  the 
Chow  Dynasty — The  First  Per-w0o/  tax  Introduced  in  the  State 
of  Lu—  Tsing  Tien  System  Abolished  in  the  State  of  Ch'in — 
Land  for  the  First  Time  Taxed  as  Private  Property— Heavy  Taxes 
in  the  Ch'in  Dynasty— Appearance  of  Landlords  and  Tenants — 
Light  Tax  on  Land  during  the  First  Part  of  Han  Dynasty- 
Attempts  to  Limit  the  Large  Landholdings— Amount  of  Land 
Cultivated  During  Han  Dynasty  and  the  Average  Holdings- 
Tax  Based  on  Gross  Produce — Other  Levies  on  Land— The  Land 
Tax  and  the  Agrarian  Population— System  of  Land  Distribution 
and  Taxation  under  the  Tsin  Dynasty— The  Progressive  House- 
hold Tax— Land  Tax  Expanded  into  a  General  Property  Tax 
during  Wei  Dynasty — Attempts  at  Redistribution  of  Land  ...  31 
279]  n 


12  CONTENTS  [280 

PAGE 

CHAPTER  III 
THE  LAND  TAX  FROM  THE  TANG  DYNASTY  TO  THE  MING  DYNASTY 

Three  Periods  of  the  History  of  Land  Tax  Prior  to  the  Tsing 
Dynasty — The  System  of  Rent,  Personal  Service  and  Household 
Tax  of  the  Tang  Dynasty— The  Progressive  Business  Tax  of  Tang 
—The  Failure  of  the  System  of  Three  Levies— The  Reform  of  Yang 
Yen  and  his  System  of  Two  Levies — Apportionment  of  the  Land 
Tax — Classified  Progressive  Income  Tax  Introduced — "  Extra 
Levies  "  Introduced  During  the  "  Five  Dynasties  " — Differentia- 
tion of  Land  during  Sung  Dynasty — Land  Tax  Collected  in  a 
Great  Variety  of  Commodities — Tax  on  Transfer  of  Land — Sys- 
tem of  Land  Tax  in  Yuan  Dynasty — A  Combination  of  the  Sys- 
tems of  the  Tang  and  the  Sung  Dynasties — Systems  of  Land  Tax 
in  the  Ming  Dynasty — Tax  Began  to  be  Paid  in  Silver— Heavy 
Taxes  at  the  End  of  Ming  Dynasty 44 

PART  II 
THE  LAND  TAX  SINCE  THE  TSING  DYNASTY 

CHAPTER  IV 
THE  LAND  POLICY 

Land  Policy  Based  on  the  Recognition  of  Agriculture  as  the  Basis 
of  National  Economy— System  of  Land  Distribution  in  the  Tsing 
Dynasty — Conditions  Imposed  on  Lands  Granted — System  of 
Subsidies — Development  of  Land  by  the  Army— The  Improve- 
ment of  Land  and  its  Reasons — Land  Tax  and  Agriculture — 
Result  of  the  Policy 57 

CHAPTER   V 
SYSTEM  OF  LAND  HOLDINGS  UNDER  THE  TSING  DYNASTY 

Four  Systems  of  Land  Holdings,  viz.,  (i)  Lands  under  Military 
Tenure,  (2)  Lands  under  Semi-Military  Tenure,  (3)  Lands  under 
Common  Tenure,  (4)  Public  Lands— Origin  of  the  Military 
Tenure — Conditions  of  Landholding  under  Military  Tenure — 
Abolition  of  Inalienability  of  Lands  under  Military  Tenure — Ori- 
gin of  Lands  under  Semi-Military  Tenure — Holders  of  Land 
under  this  Tenure  Required  to  Contribute  Special  Services — Taxes 
on  Tun-Tien— Great  Bulk  of  Land  under  Common  Tenure — The 
Theory  of  Landholding  in  China — Different  Kinds  of  Land  under 
Common  Tenure— Public  Lands  in  China .  65 


281]  CONTENTS  13 

PAGE 

CHAPTER  VI 
MODES  OF  ACQUIRING  AND  TRANSFERRING  LANDS 

Four  Methods  of  Acquiring  Land— Transfer  by  Sale — Tax  on 
Transfer  of  Land  by  Sale — Irrevocable  and  Revocable  Sales — 
Transfer  by  Mortgage — Tien-tan  and  Mortgage  Distinguished — 
Historical  Sequence  of  the  Three  Forms  of  Transfer — Conversion 
of  Mortgage  into  Sale— Distinction  between  Soil  and  Surface  of 
Land  in  Transfer — Transfer  of  Land  by  Inheritance — The  Princi- 
ples of  "Equal  Division"  and  its  Economic  Significance— Ac- 
quisition of  Abandoned  or  New  Land — The  Chinese  Theory  of 
Land  Holdings — Its  Economic  Effects — Large  Holdings  Rare 
in  China — Leases  of  Land — Chinese  Theory  of  Incidence  of  the 
Land  Tax 74 

CHAPTER  VII 

THE  NATURE  AND  THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  LAND  TAX  UNDER 

THE  TSING  DYNASTY 

The  So-called  Land  Tax  Consists  of  Four  Elements,  viz.,  (i)  The 
Land  Tax  Proper,  (2)  The  Grain  Tribute,  (3)  The  Poll  Tax  and 
(4)  The  Surcharges— Reforms  of  the  Land  Tax  System  in  the 
Early  Part  of  the  Dynasty — Administrative  Reforms — The  Per- 
manent Settlement  of  1713— The  Basis  of  the  Tax  under  the  Tsing 
Dynasty — Multiplicity  of  Rates — Tax  Assessed  in  Money  and  in 
Produce— The  Grain  Tributes  Required  as  Part  of  the  Land  Tax 
— Other  Charges  Collected — Commutation  into  Money  Payment 
—Estimated  Value  of  Grains  Paid— The  Origin  of  the  Poll-Tax 
—The  Rates— The  Methods  of  Collection— The  Amount  of  the 
Tax  and  the  Meaning  of  "  Taxable  Head"— The  Permanent  Set- 
tlement and  the  Poll  Tax — Reasons  for  Declaring  the  Immutability 
of  the  Tax— Amalgamation  of  the  Poll-Tax  with  the  Land—Poll 
Tax  Distributed  among  the  Payers  of  Land  Tax— Development 
of  the  Surcharges — The  Earliest  Form  of  Surcharges — Reforms 
at  the  Beginning  of  the  Tsing  Dynasty — Reasons  for  the  Failures 
of  the  Reforms — Surcharges  Amalgamated  with  the  Regular 
Receipts  from  the  Tax— Amount  of  Surcharges  Collected — Sum- 
mary. . 86 

CHAPTER  VIII 
COLLECTION  AND  ADMINISTRATION  OF  THE  LAND  TAX  UNDER 

THE  TSING  DYNASTY 

Framework  of  the  System  of  Collection— The  Board  of  Revenue, 
its  Organization  and  Characteristic  Features — The  Departments 


I4  CONTENTS  [282 

PAGE 

of  the  Board  and  their  Relations  to  the  Provincial  Authorities  of 
Tax  Collection— Criticism— The  Provincial  Authorities  as  Fiscal 
Agents  of  the  Central  Government— The  Organization  of  the 
Provincial  Administration— The  Fu  as  a  Division  of  Administra- 
tion— The  Hsien  as  an  Unit  in  Tax  Collection — The  Functions 
and  Responsibilities  of  the  District  Magistrate  as  a  Tax-Collector 
—Subdivisions  of  the  Hsien — Criticisms  of  the  System 108 

CHAPTER  IX      - 
ANALYSIS  OF  THE  DEFECTS  OF  THE  SYSTEM 

Multiplicity  of  Rates  and  its  Results :  Complexity  and  Inequality- 
Lack  of  Uniform  Standards  of  Measurement — Discussion  of  Some 
of  the  Important  Variations  in  the  Units  of  Measurement— Cha- 
otic Condition  of  the  Currency  and  Effect  on  Tax  Collection — Con- 
version of  Rates  into  the  Different  Forms  of  Money — Lack  of  a 
Uniform  Unit  of  Payment — Lack  of  a  Scientific  Tax  Roll— Eva- 
sion and  Corruption— Administration  Defects 120 

CHAPTER  X 

THE  LAND  TAX  AND  THE  SEPARATION  OF  THE  NATIONAL, 
PROVINCIAL  AND  LOCAL  REVENUE 

Early  Revenue  Relations  between  the  Central  and  the  Provincial 
Government  in  Tsing  Dynasty — Division  of  the  Land  Tax 
between  the  Central  and  the  Local  Governments — Rise  and  De- 
velopment of  the  Question  of  Separation  in  Connection  with  the 
Land  Tax  Reform — Arguments  in  Favor  of  Making  the  Land 
Tax  a  Source  of  Revenue  of  the  Provincial  and  Local  Govern- 
ment— A  Large  Part  of  the  Tax  Hitherto  Retained  for  Provincial 
Purposes — Variation  of  Local  Conditions  Favor  Localization  of  the 
Land  Tax — Reforms  May  Be  Effected  More  Rapidly — Appropria- 
tion of  the  Tax  for  Local  Purposes  Encourage  Development  of 
Local  Self-Government — Nature  of  the  Tax  in  Favor  of  its  Being 
Used  as  a  Source  of  Local  Revenue — The  Tax  Better  Administered 
by  Provincial  Authorities — General  Criticism  of  the  Arguments — 
Appropriation  of  Grain-Tributes  for  Provincial  Purposes — Argu- 
ments in  Favor — Criticisms — Results  of  the  Controversy — Tax 
Retained  by  the  Central  Government,  and  Provincial  Authorities 
Allowed  to  Attach  "  Additional*  " 130 


2g3]  CONTENTS  15 

PAGE 

CHAPTER  XI 
THE  LAND  TAX  REFORM 

Importance  of  the  Land  Tax  Reform— Sir  Robert  Hart's  Estimate  of 
the  Possible  Yields  of  the  Tax— His  Plan  of  Reform  Analysed— 
Criticisms — The  Real  Significance  of  His  Memorandum — Sir 
George  Jamieson's  Estimate  of  the  Yield  of  the  Land  Tax  in  Honan 
—His  Estimate  of  the  Yield  of  the  Entire  Country— Reasons  for 
Accepting  Jamieson's  Estimated  Average  Rate— Amount  of  Tax- 
able Lands  in  China— Taxable  Land  in  China  Compared  with 
that  of  British  India — Estimate  Supported  by  Historical  Data — 
Objection  to  the  Estimated  Yield  of  the  Tax  Answered—  Result 
of  the  salt  gabelle  reform  as  an  Evidence  to  Support  the  Claim  .  145 

CHAPTER  XII 
THE  LAND  TAX  REFORM  (CONTINUED) 

Recent  Reforms  of  the  Land  Tax— Consolidation  of  the  Levies  and  • 
Conversion  into  Money  Payment — Provisions  Made  for  the  Ex- 
penses of  Collection — Confirmation  of  Title  Deeds  on  Land- 
Creation  of  the  Bureau  of  Land  Measurement— Compilation  of  a 
Temporary  Tax  Roll— Some  of  the  Problems  of  Reform— Deter- 
mination of  the  Basis  of  the  Tax— The  Principle  of  Selling  Value 
versus  that  of  Produce  as  Applied  in  China — Objections  to  Tax- 
ing Land  on  Selling  Value  Considered — The  Question  of  Ex- 
emption of  Improvements  in  China— Creation  of  a  Separate 
Machinery  of  Administration 160 


APPENDICES 

APPENDIX  A 
BIBLIOGRAPHY. 173 

APPENDIX  B 
UNITS  OF  MEASUREMENT 176 

APPENDIX  C 

NAMES  AND  EPOCHS  OF  THE  DYNASTIES  .    • 177 


16  CONTENTS  [284 

PAGE 

APPENDIX  D 
REIGNING  PERIODS  OF  THE  EMPERORS  OF  TSING  DYNASTY  ....    178 


APPENDIX  E 
RETURNS  OF  THE  LAND  TAX 178 


PART  I 

THE  LAND  TAX  PRIOR  TO  THE 
TSING  DYNASTY 


CHAPTER  I 
THE  LAND  TAX  IN  ANTIQUITY 

THE  history  of  the  land  tax  in  China  may  be  divided 
two  periods,  namely  the  Feudal  Period  and  the  Period  of 
Private  Property.1  The  Feudal  Period  began  with  the 
time  of  Huang-Ti  (2697  B.  C.)  and  closed  with  the  fall 
of  the  Chow  dynasty  (249  B.  C.).  During  these  twenty- 
four  centuries  land  was  held  not  as  private  but  rather  as 
communal  property  and  the  levies  imposed  upon  it  partook 
of  the  nature  of  tributes  or  contributions  rather  than  of 
taxes.  The  Period  of  Private  Property  may  be  said  to* 
have  found  its  real  beginning  with  the  establishment  of 
the  Ch'in  dynasty  (221-207  B.  C.).  In  place  of  the  numer- 
ous feudal  landlords  with  the  emperor  as  their  nominal  head 
there  was  at  this  time  established  a  strong  and  absolute 
monarchy.  Private  property  in  land  was  recognized. 

1  The  principal  sources  of  information  on  the  early  land  tax  in 
China  are  to  be  found  in  the  great  historical  collections  entitled  the 
Twenty-four  Histories  (Er  Shih  Szu  Shih)  which  will  be  referred  to 
by  their  individual  name  and  in  Ma  Tuan-Lin's  General  Research  of 
Records  and  Authorities  (Wen  Hsien  Tung  Kao)  which  is  a  very 
comprehensive  collection  of  extracts  from  all  kinds  of  authoritative 
writings  from  the  beginning  of  written  records  to  the  thirteenth  cen- 
tury classified  according  to  topics,  with  occasional  comments  and  ex- 
planations by  the  author.  The  parts  which  contain  the  most  valuable 
information  on  the  land  tax  are  as  follows:  bks.  1-6,  "Land  Tax"; 
bks.  lo-ii,  "Population";  bk.  22,  "Tribute";  bks.  23-24,  "National 
Expenditure";  bks.  150-154,  "Organization  of  the  Army";  and  bks. 
260-261,  "  Feudalism  ".  The  other  sources  of  information'  which  have 
been  consulted  freely  in  the  preparation  of  this  part  of  the  work  are: 
The  Early  History  of  China  (Shian  Shu  Chu  Shu}  ;  The  Government 
of  Chow  (Chow  Li) . 

287]  19 


20 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [288 


The  first  mention  of  a  levy  on  land  in  China  was  found 
as  early  as  the  time  of  Huang-Ti  who,  according  to  Chi- 
nese history,  was  the  son  of  the  Prince  of  Yu-Hsiong. 
When  he  became  prince,  succeeding  his  father,  he  found 
that  the  Emperor  had  become  very  weak  in  his  con- 
trol over  the  feudal  lords,  who  were  waging  wars  against 
each  other.  By  a  series  of  conquests  he  brought  these  re- 
bellious princes  into  subjugation  and  made  them  acknowl- 
edge him  as  their  Emperor.  As  a  token  of  their  allegiance 
he  required  them  to  pay  tributes  which  they  derived  from 
levies  on  the  produce  of  the  lands  under  their  control.  The 
nature  of  these  early  levies  is  not  definitely  known.  Some 
Chinese  writers  suggest  that  they  were  tithes  similar  to 
those  of  the  Hsia  dynasty.1 

Whatever  the  nature  of  these  early  levies,  they  continued 
to  be  collected  by  the  successors  of  Emperor  Huang.  Em- 
peror Quo,  who  was  the  third  successor  of  Huang-Ti,  was 
said  to  be  a  good  emperor,  for  he,  besides  possessing  other 
virtues,  "  did  not  use  wastefully  the  levies  that  he  collected 
from  the  soil."  z  With  the  accession  of  Emperor  Yao  the 
control  of  the  central  government  over  the  feudal  lords 
was  greatly  strengthened  and  levies  continued  to  be  col- 
lected. But  toward  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Emperor  Shun, 
who  succeeded  Yao,  there  occurred  a  great  deluge  which 
lasted  for  thirteen  years  and  inflicted  untold  damage  upon 
the  people  and  their  land.  Yu  was  then  appointed  to  take 
charge  of  the  great  task  of  bringing  the  waters  under  control. 
He  succeeded  well  in  restoring  to  the  people  their  flooded 
land,  and  on  account  of  that  success  he  became  Emperor 
on  the  death  of  Shun  and  founded  the  Hsia  dynasty.  The 
Hsia  dynasty  (2150-1780  B.  C.)  is  generally  regarded 
by  Chinese  historians  as  the  dawn  of  China's  authentic 

1  Wen  Hsien  Tung  Kao,  bk.  xii,  folio  25. 

*  Sze  Ma  Chien,  Historical  Records,  vol.  ii,  p.  2. 


289]  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  ANTIQUITY  21 

history,  although  the  record  of  this  period  is  not  entirely 
free  from  much  that  is  vague  and  uncertain. 

After  the  flood  was  brought  under  control,  Emperor  Yu 
instituted  a  system  of  land  holding  and  taxation  known 
as  the  tribute  system  (kung  fa)  which  continued  in  force 
throughout  the  Hsia  dynasty.  Although  there  have  been 
many  differences  of  opinion  among  Chinese  writers  in  re- 
gard to  the  nature  of  the  system  of  land  tenure  during  this 
period,  the  salient  features  of  the  system  are  fairly  clear. 
Apparently  land  was  held  to  belong  not  to  individuals,  nor 
to  the  emperor,  nor  to  the  feudal  chiefs,  but  to  the  people  at 
large.  Every  man  when  he  reached  his  twentieth  year  was 
entitled  to  receive  a  piece  of  land  amounting  to  fifty  mow.1 
When  he  reached  his  sixtieth  year  and  was  no  longer  able 
to  make  full  use  of  the  land,  it  reverted  to  the  community. 
The  reason  for  the  introduction  of  this  system  of  land 
holding  is  probably  to  be  found  in  the  scarcity  of  land  which 
must  have  been  felt  after  the  deluge  of  the  country.2 

For  the  purposes  of  administration  and  taxation  Em- 
peror Yu  divided  the  country  into  nine  chow,  or  provinces. 
The  central  province,  Chi  Chow,  was  known  as  the  imperial 
domain,  and  its  revenue  was  reserved  for  the  exclusive  use 
of  the  Emperor.  The  cultivators  within  the  imperial  do- 
main were  required  to  share  with  him  one-tenth  of  the  gross 
produce  of  the  land,  which  was  called  kung  or  tribute, 
referring  to  its  nature  as  a  gift  or  voluntary  contribution. 
The  kind  of  the  produce  to  be  paid  was  determined  by  the 

1  Cf.  infra,  pp.  25-26. 

2  It  seems  rather  surprising  that  no  writer,  as  far  as  we  are  aware, 
has  ever  offered  any  explanation  for  the  introduction  of  the  limitation 
of  land  holdings  to  fifty  mow.    It  seems  to  be  a  reasonable  theory  that 
before  the  deluge  land  was  probably  abundant  and  everybody,  as  in 
most  primitive  communities,  appropriated  for  himself  as  much  land 
as  he  could  cultivate,  but  that  after  the  inundation  arable  land  be- 
came rarer  and  limitation  became  necessary. 


22  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [290 

distance  of  the  cultivator  from  the  imperial  capital.  The 
domain  was  divided  into  five  zones.  Those  who  were  within 
one  hundred  li  of  the  capital  paid  their  tribute  in  the  entire 
plants;  those  who  were  within  two  hundred  li  in  spikes; 
those  who  were  within  three  hundred  li  in  unhusked  grain ; 
those  within  four  hundred  li  in  husked  grain;  and  those 
within  five  hundred  li  in  cleaned  rice.  The  underlying 
reason  for  this  arrangement  was  the  cost  of  transportation. 
The  people  who  were  near  the  capital  could  pay  their  tributes 
in  the  more  bulky  forms  of  grain,  while  those  who  were 
at  a  great  distance  from  the  capital  must  pay  theirs  in  the 
least  bulky  form. 

The  other  eight  provinces  were  parcelled  out  among  a 
large  number  of  feudal  princes.  But  the  rate  of  levy  was 
the  same  as  in  the  imperial  domain,  the  princes  collecting 
one-tenth  of  the  produce  from  the  people,  part  of  which  they 
were  required  to  share  with  the  Emperor.  As  China  had  not 
yet  entered  the  stage  of  money  economy  at  this  time,  these 
contributions  to  the  emperor  were  also  paid  in  kind.  They 
could  not,  however,  be  paid  in  grain  because  the  transporta- 
tion of  this  bulky  produce  from  remote  parts  to  the  capital 
was  too  costly.  Besides,  the  emperor  was  already  well  sup- 
plied with  that  commodity  by  the  tributes  from  the  imperial 
domain.  The  natural  alternative  was  to  pay  them  in  various 
valuable  articles.  The  feudal  princes  in  the  Province  of 
Tsing,  for  example,  were  required  to  pay  their  contribution 
to  the  emperor  in  salt,  flaxen  textiles,  sea  produce,  silks, 
precious  stones  and  wild  silk  in  wicker  baskets.1  Those 
in  the  Province  of  Yang  paid  in  metals  of  three  kinds,  in 
jades,  rattan,  ivory,  hides,  hair,  timber,  satin  and  fruits.2 

1  Sze  Ma  Chien,  Historical  Records,  vol.  ii,  p.  3. 

*  Tsing  Chow  corresponds  to  the  central  part  of  the  modern  province 
of  Shantung  and  Yang  Chow  corresponds  to  southern  part  of  Shensi 
and  part  of  iSzechuan. 


2QI]  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  ANTIQUITY  23 

Similarly,  the  princes  in  the  other  provinces  were  required 
to  send  in  their  contributions  in  the  kind  of  articles  for 
which  the  locality  was  noted. 

The  Hsia  dynasty  lasted  about  four  hundred  years  and 
was  succeeded  by  the  Shang  dynasty  (1783-1122).  The 
system  of  land  taxation  adopted  by  the  Shang  dynasty  was 
known  as  tsu  fa  (aid  system)  or  tsing  tien  (nine-square  sys- 
tem). The  former  term  was  derived  from  the  name  of  the 
levies  which  were  imposed  on  land  during  this  dynasty,  while 
the  latter  from  the  manner  in  which  land  was  distributed  and 
taxes  levied.  Besides  its  significance  as  a  system  of  taxa- 
tion and  landholding  the  tsing  tien  system  was  a  very  im- 
portant social  and  economic  institution  of  ancient  China.1 
There  has  been  considerable  dispute  among  Chinese  scholars 
in  regard  to  the  time  when  the  system  first  came  into  ex- 
istence. Some  writers  claim  that  it  was  invented  by  Em- 
peror Huang.2  Whatever  the  origin,  it  was  adopted  by 
Emperor  Tang,  the  founder  of  the  Shang  dynasty,  as  a 
general  system  of  landholding  and  taxation.  According 
to  this  plan  all  land  that  could  be  cultivated  was  divided 
into  lots  of  630  mow  each,  which  was  subdivided  into  nine 
squares  of  seventy  mow  each.  Each  of  the  nine  squares, 
except  the  central  one,  was  allotted  to  a  family.  The  cen- 
tral square  was  cultivated  in  common  and  its  produce  went 
to  the  government  in  lieu  of  taxes  on  the  entire  plot.  Part 
of  this  central  square,  amounting  to  fourteen  mow,  was 
reserved,  however,  for  the  dwellings  of  the  eight  families 
cultivating  the  lot.  The  amount  to  be  cultivated  in  common 
by  the  eight  families  was  therefore  fifty-six  mow  instead 

1  For  a  discussion  of  the  tsing  tien  system  as  a  social  institution  vide 
Chen  Huan-Chang,  Economic  Principles  of  Confucius  and  His  School, 
vol.  ii,  pp.  497-553.  The  author  is  not  in  complete  agreement  with  Dr. 
Chen,  however,  in  several  points  of  his  interpretation  of  the  system. 

8  Wen  Hsien  Tung  Kao,  bk.  xii,  f.  24. 


24  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [292 

of  seventy,  or  seven  mow  to  the  family.  The  rate  of  the 
burden,  therefore,  amounted  practically  to  a  tithe. 

It  would  be  interesting  to  inquire  into  the  reasons  why  the 
peculiar  system  of  landholding  was  introduced  in  place  of 
the  tribute  system  and  what  were  its  economic  and  social 
effects;  but  this,  however,  would  carry  us  too  far  afield. 
Suffice  to  point  out  here  that  so  far  as  taxation  is  con- 
sidered the  tsing  tien  system  was  considered  to  be  an 
improvement  over  the  tribute  system.  Under  the  tribute 
system,  as  has  been  pointed  out  by  an  ancient  writer,1  the 
rate  was  originally  in  proportion  to  the  annual  produce; 
but  in  the  course  of  time  it  became  a  fixed  amount  based 
on  the  average  of  several  years.1  In  good  years,  he  points 
out,  this  average  was  often  too  low  and  in  bad  years  it  be- 
came oppressive.  Under  the  tsing  tien  system,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  situation  was  entirely  different,  the  tax  being 
always  the  produce  of  the  central  square  cultivated  in  com- 
mon by  the  eight  farmers. 

Although  the  tsing  tien  system  was  instituted  in  the  Shang 
dynasty,  it  did  not  reach  its  full  development  until  the 
Chow  dynasty  (1122-249  B.  C.)  which  really  marks  the 
beginning  of  a  new  epoch  in  Chinese  history.  Indeed,  the 
position  of  the  Chow  dynasty  in  the  history  of  Chinese 
civilization  is,  in  many  ways,  similar  to  that  of  Greece  in 
the  history  of  European  civilization.  Much  of  the  legal  code, 
the  political  organization  and  the  social  system  of  China 
originated  in  the  Chow  dynasty. 

The  system  of  taxation  adopted  by  the  founders  of  the 
Chow  dynasty  was  a  combination  of  the  two  preceding  sys- 
tems. For  lands  lying  near  the  imperial  capital  or  other 
centers  of  administration  the  system  of  tribute  was  substi- 
tuted for  that  of  tsing  tien.  The  reason,  as  given  by  one 

1  Wen  Hsien  Tung  Kao,  bk.  i,  f .  2 ;  cf.  also  Chen,  op.  cit.,  vol.  ii, 
pp.  623-624. 


293]  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  ANTIQUITY  25 

ancient  writer,  was  that  in  order  to  administer  the  system 
of  taxing  one-tenth  of  the  gross  produce  justly  a  close 
contact  on  the  part  of  the  government  with  the  people  was 
necessary.1  For  the  produce  of  the  land  varied  from  year 
to  year  and  the  rate  of  the  tax  must  be  adjusted  to  the* 
fluctuations  of  the  annual  produce.  In  the  case  of  the  land 
near  the  capital  and  other  cities  such  contact  and  super- 
vision was  possible  and  hence  the  system  was  readopted. 
Perhaps  a  second  reason  for  the  preference  of  the  tsing 
tien  system  over  the  tribute  system  is  to  be  found  in  that 
under  the  former  the  burden  was  probably  not  keenly  felt 
by  the  people.  The  government  did  not  take  part  of  the 
individual's  produce  but  merely  collected  the  produce  of 
the  public  field.  The  tax  was  paid  without  the  contributors 
being  clearly  conscious  of  it. 

For  the  greater  part  of  the  country,  however  the  tsing 
tien  system  was  retained.  But  the  laws  governing  the 
distribution  of  the  land  and  the  administration  oi  the 
tax  during  this  period  were  much  more  developed  and 
definite  than  those  of  the  preceding  dynasty.  Instead 
of  dividing  each  lot  into  630  mow,,  each  lot  of  land  was 
now  divided  into  one  thousand  mow,  which  was  subdivided 
in  a  similar  manner  into  nine  squares  of  one  hundred  mozv 
each.  It  has  not  been  possible  to  determine  exactly  the  size 
of  mow  used  in  the  Hsia  or  Shang  dynasty.  But  it  is, 
known  that  in  the  Chow  dynasty  one  mow  was  recognized 
as  one  hundred  square  pace,  one  pace  being  six  feet.  The 
length  of  an  ancient  foot  must  not,  however,  be  confused 
with  that  of  the  modern  foot.  One  ancient  foot  equals  to 
only  .81  of  a  modern  foot.2  The  mow  in  Chow  dynasty  is 
therefore  equal  to  3,600  square  feet  (2,961  square  modern 

1  Tung  Kao,  op.  cit.,  bk.  i,  f.  5. 

2  Cf.  infra,  p.  122. 


26  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [294 

Chinese  feet)  or  a  little  less  than  one-half  of  the  modern 
mow.  As  each  lot  contains  nine  hundred  mow,  it  is  there- 
fore equivalent  to  1,800  feet  square.  This  distance,  namely 
i, 800  feet,  was  called  a  li.  Hence  one  lot  of  nine  hundred 
mow  is  equal  also  to  one  li  square.  The  ancient  system  of 
land  measurement  in  China  has  often  been  misunderstood 
by  modern  writers,  and  that  misunderstanding  has  given 
rise  to  many  a  ridiculous  calculation.1 

The  system  of  allotting  land  in  the  Chow  dynasty  was 
similar  to  that  of  the  Shang  dynasty.  Each  of  the  nine 
squares,  except  the  central  one,  was  assigned,  as  in  the 
preceding  dynasty,  to  one  of  the  eight  families  who  were 
required  to  cultivate  four-fifths  of  the  central  equare  in 
common  and  turn  over  its  produce  to  the  government  as  a 
lax,  one-fifth  of  the  central  square  being  set  aside  for  the 
dwellings  of  the  farmers.  The  system  of  the  Chow  dynasty 
differed,  however,  from  that  of  the  preceding  dynasty  in 
several  important  respects.  Instead  of  assigning  to  each 
family  an  equal  amount  of  land  without  reference  to  its 
fertility,  as  was  done  in  the  preceding  dynasty,  consideration 
was  now  taken  of  the  productivity  of  the  soil.  Lands  were 
classified  into  three  classes.  Those  which  could  be  culti- 
vated every  year  without  decrease  of  returns  were  classed 
as  best;  those  that  could  be  cultivated  only  every  other 
year,  as  good;  and  those  cultivable  every  third  year,  as 
medium.  In  distributing  the  land  there  were,  according 
to  records  that  have  come  down  to  us,  three  different 
methods  in  vogue.  According  to  the  first  method,  each 
family  was  given  one  hundred  mow  of  the  best  land,  or  two 
hundred  mow  of  the  second  best,  or  three  hundred  mow 
of  the  medium  land.  But  in  places  where  prairie  lands 

1  Chen  Huan-Chang,  for  example,  has  greatly  misrepresented  the 
territorial  organization  of  ancient  China  by  failing  to  understand  the 
unit  of  land  measurement  used  in  ancient  time.  Cf.  op.  cit.,  vol.  ii,  p.  639. 


295]  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  ANTIQUITY  27 

were  used,  each  family  was  given  one  hundred  mow  of 
arable  land  with  an  additional  tract  of  prairie  land  the  size 
of  which  varied  with  the  class  of  arable  land  received  by 
the  family.  Those  families  who  had  each  received  one 
hundred  mow  of  the  best  arable  land  were  entitled  to  re- 
ceive fifty  mow  of  the  prairie  land,  while  those  who  had 
each  received  one  hundred  mow  of  the  second  best  or 
medium  land  were  given,  respectively,  one  hundred  or  two 
hundred  mow  of  the  prairie  land.  But  in  some  places  the 
distribution  of  the  land  was  based  upon  the  number  of  de- 
pendents in  the  family.  A  family  of  seven  persons  in  which 
there  were  at  least  three  able  to  work  was  given  one  hundred 
mow  of  the  best  land.  A  family  of  six  persons  might  to- 
gether with  another  family  of  the  same  number  of  persons 
be  given  one  hundred  mow  of  the  second  best  land,  while 
a  family  of  five  persons  in  which  only  two  persons  were 
capable  of  doing  farm  work  would  be  given  one  hundred 
mow  of  the  medium  land. 

Under  this  system  every  husbandman,  when  he  reached 
twenty  years  of  age  was  entitled  to  receive  his  allotment 
of  land,  which  he  was  required  to  return  to  the  state  when  he 
reached  his  sixtieth  year  of  age.  Under  the  first  two 
methods  of  distribution  mentioned  above  an  additional 
amount  of  twenty-five  mow  was  allowed  to  every  male 
member  of  the  family  who  had  reached  his  sixteenth  year. 
Scholars  and  artisans  and  merchants  were  also  entitled  to 
receive  land  at  the  rate  of  one-fifth  the  amount  of  the 
husbandmen.  In  addition  to  lands  for  cultivation  each 
family  was  given  five  mow  for  dwelling  purposes. 

One  of  the  most  important  conditions  under  which  land 
was  given  was  that  the  person  or  family  receiving  it  must 
make  use  of  it.  There  were  laws  providing,  for  example, 
that  a  family  which  received  land  from  the  state  but  did 


2g  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [296 

not  cultivate  it  was  liable  to  pay  taxes  three  times  as  heavy 
as  normal  taxes,  and  a  family  that  received  ground  for 
houses  must  also  plant  flax  or  mulberry  trees  or  they  would 
be  liable  to  pay  the  tax  in  silk  twenty-five  times  as  heavy  as 
that  paid  by  the  other  families.  Every  individual  was  also 
required  by  law  to  be  engaged  in  some  profession.  There 
was  at  that  time  no  poll-tax.  But  an  able-bodied  man  who 
had  no  regular  occupation  was  held  liable  for  the  payment 
of  an  annual  tax  equivalent  to  the  amount  imposed  on  one 
hundred  mow  of  land.1 

The  rate  of  the  tax  during  the  Chow  dynasty  was  also 
one-tenth  of  the  gross  produce,  irrespective  of  the  method 
under  which  the  family  or  individual  received  his  land  from 
the  state.  For  the  purpose  of  administration  and  tax  collec- 
tion the  country  was  divided,  as  in  the  preceding  dynasties, 
into  nine  provinces,  or  chow.  But  the  system  of  distribu- 
tion of  land  and  feudal  organization  of  the  Chow  dynasty 
was  much  more  developed  than  that  of  the  Hsia  or  Shang 
dynasties.  A  classification  of  the  feudal  princes  into  five 
orders  was  introduced.  The  five  orders  were  dukes 
(kwon),  marquises  (hou),  earls  (pei),  viscounts  (tsu),  and 
barons  (Ian).  The  landholdings  of  these  princes  were  also 
unified.  A  duke  or  marquis  was  entitled  to  rule  over  a 
territory  of  one  hundred  li  square;  an  earl,  seventy  li 
square;  and  a  viscount  or  a  baron  fifty  li  square.  These 
were  again  classified  as  the  first,  second  and  third  class 
estates.  These  estates  were  distributed  equally  among  the 
eight  chow,  each  of  which  contained  thirty  first-class,  sixty 
second-class  and  one  hundred  and  twenty  third-class  estates, 
making  a  total  of  two  hundred  and  ten  estates  in  one  chow. 
The  ninth  chow  was  reserved  as  the  imperial  domain  and 
divided  for  revenue  purposes  among  the  ministers  of  the 

1  Tung  Kao,  bk.  i,  f.  3. 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  ANTIQUITY  2g 

emperor.  The  large  or  first-class  estates  were  required 
to  share  with  the  emperor  one-half  of  the  land  taxes  which 
they  collected ;  the  medium  estates,  one-third  and  the  small 
estates  one-fourth.  In  other  words,  we  find  here  the  first 
application  of  the  principle  of  progression.1  In  many  ways 
these  feudal  princes,  of  which  there  were,  according  to  the 
records,  over  ten  thousand  when  Yu  founded  his  dynasty, 
and  over  three  thousand  when  Tang  came  to  the  throne  as 
founder  of  the  Shang  dynasty,  were  in  reality  great  feudal 
landlords.  When  the  Chow  dynasty  came  to  power  there 
were  still  some  seventeen  hundred  of  these  feudal  lords. 
Each  of  them  was  entitled  to  collect  one-tenth  of  the  gross 
produce  from  the  people  within  his  jurisdiction,  but  they 
were  required  to  send  to  the  emperor  part  of  their  income 
at  a  progressive  rate. 

In  addition  to  the  tithe  which  the  people  had  to  pay  from 
the  produce  of  their  land,  they  were  also  required  to  render 
to  the  government  certain  services  and  furnish  certain 
military  equipment.  For  the  latter  purpose  the  tsing  tien 
was  taken  as  a  unit.  Every  sixty- four  tsing  or  lots  were 
required  to  furnish  four  horses,  one  chariot,  three  chariot- 
eers, seventy-two  foot  soldiers  and  twenty-five  men.  For 
the  former  purpose  a  census  was  maintained  by  the  govern- 
ment. Those  who  lived  in  the  cities  were  held  liable  to 
render  service  from  the  age  of  twenty  to  sixty-five,  while 
those  in  the  country  were  liable  to  be  called  between  the 
ages  of  fifteen  and  sixty.  But  the  law  also  provided  that 
no  more  than  one  person  should  be  called  from  each  family 
at  one  time  and  that  the  length  of  service  should  not  exceed 
three  days.* 

From  this  account  it  can  be  readily  seen  that  the  system 

lCf.  Edwin  R.  A.  Seligman,  Progressive  Taxation  in  Theory  and 
Practice  (and  ed.),  p.  n. 
*  Tung  Kao,  bk.  x,  f .  10. 


30  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [298 

of  taxation  during  the  Chow  dynasty  was  much  more 
elaborate  and  advanced  than  that  of  either  of  the  two 
preceding  dynasties.  The  system  of  the  Hsia  dynasty 
was  based  on  the  simple  principle  of  taxing  one-tenth  of 
the  gross  produce.  It  worked  satisfactorily  because  the 
method  and  intensity  of  cultivation  were  then  fairly  uni- 
form. The  Shang  dynasty  made  an  attempt  to  improve 
the  situation  by  the  introduction  of  the  tsing  tien  system 
the  advantages  of  which  over  the  tribute  system  have  already 
been  pointed  out.1  In  the  main  the  tsing  tien  system  was 
retained  by  the  Chow  dynasty.  But  the  system  of  the  Chow 
dynasty  was  a  step  in  advance  of  the  Shang  in  that  it  recog- 
nized the  difference  of  fertility  and  adopted  a  classification 
of  land. 

During  these  three  dynasties  the  idea  of  taxation  also 
underwent  a  remarkable  development.  Perhaps  nothing 
could  better  illustrate  this  than  a  comparison  of  the  terms 
used  in  the  three  dynasties  to  denote  the  taxes  collected. 
In  the  Hsia  dynasty  the  levy  on  the  produce  of  the  land,  as 
we  have  seen,  was  called  kung  or  tribute.  The  idea  here 
was  that  of  a  gift.  Emperor  Yu  had  brought  the  devastating 
flood  under  control  and  instituted  for  the  first  time  a  well- 
organized  government.  The  people  were  glad  to  make  the 
government  a  present.  In  the  Shang  dynasty  the  levy  was 
called  tsu  or  aid.  The  function  of  the  government  as  an 
institution  was  then  more  clearly  recognized.  In  paying 
part  of  their  produce  to  the  government  the  people  were 
no  longer  making  a  present  but  giving  the  government  some 
assistance.  In  the  Chow  dynasty  the  ideas  of  universality 
and  compulsion  were  developed.  The  levy  was  now  called 
chehf  or  universal  contribution.  It  was  no  longer  a  volun- 
tary gift  or  a  semi-voluntary  aid  but  a  universal  obligation.2 
1  Cf.  supra,  pp.  24-25. 

2C/.    Seligman,   Essays  in    Taxation,    pp.   4-5;    Chen    Huan-Chang, 
op.  cit.,  vol.  ii,  pp.  621-622. 


CHAPTER  II 

LAND  TAX  FROM  THE  CH'IN  DYNASTY  TO  THE  Sui 
DYNASTY 

IN  discussing  the  system  of  taxation  of  the  Chow  dynasty 
it  would  perhaps  be  more  accurate  to  divide,  as  the  histor- 
ians do,  the  dynasty  into  two  periods,  namely,  the  Western 
Chow  (1100-770  B.  C)  and  the  Eastern  Chow  (770-249 
B.  C. )  dynasties.  For  after  the  capital  of  the  dynasty  was 
moved  from  the  West  to  the  East  and  the  dynasty  became 
known  as  the  Eastern  Chow,  the  country  went  through  a 
very  rapid  and  thorough  transformation,  politically  as  well 
as  socially,  so  that  the  general  character  of  the  social  and 
economic  conditions  of  the  country  during  the  second  period 
was  quite  distinct  from  that  of  the  first  period.  At  the  be- 
ginning of  the  dynasty  there  were  some  seventeen  hundred 
states  and  there  was  a  more  or  less  uniform  system  of  land 
distribution  and  taxation.  But  at  the  time  when  the  capital 
was  moved  from  Hao  (in  Shensi)  to  Luyang  (in  Honan) 
the  number  of  states  had  been  reduced  to  less  than  two  hun- 
dred, of  which  only  a  dozen  were  considered  as  important, 
the  others  rallying  themselves  around  the  larger  states. 
This  fact  alone  would  be  sufficient  to  show  the  social  and 
economic  transformation  that  must  have  been  going  on  dur- 
ing this  period.  With  the  consolidation  of  the  numerous 
petty  feudal  holdings  into  a  number  of  powerful  states  and 
a  consequent  struggle  for  supremacy  among  them,  the  sys- 
tem of  equal  distribution  of  land  began  to  break  down 
throughout  the  Empire.  Taxes  were  now  increased  in  order 
to  maintain  the  struggle  and  to  meet  the  heavy  expenses  of 
the  wars.  It  would  carry  us  too  far  afield  if  we  were  to 
299]  3-1 


32  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [300 

trace  the  causes  and  results  of  the  remarkable  and  far- 
reaching  transformation  which  took  place  during  this 
period.  But  if  we  are  to  understand  the  changes  in  the  sys- 
tem of  land  taxation  that  had  taken  place  toward  the  end  of 
the  Chow  dynasty  and  in  the  Ch'in  dynasty  which  succeeded 
it,  these  facts  must  be  borne  in  mind. 

Instead  of  a  uniform  system  of  land  distribution  and  tax- 
ation, such  as  had  existed  in  the  early  part  of  the  dynasty, 
various  changes  were  now  introduced.  In  the  State  of  Lu 
(modern  Shantung)  we  find  the  first  departure  from  the 
traditional  principle  of  taxing  the  land  at  the  rate  of  one- 
tenth,  which  had  been  followed  for  nearly  two  thousand 
years.  In  the  fifteenth  year  (594  B.  C.)  of  his  rule  Duke 
Hsuan  first  introduced  a  per-mow  tax  on  land  in  addition 
to  the  produce  that  he  collected  from  public  fields  cultivated 
in  common  by  the  people.  This  was  condemned  by  Con- 
fucius as  "  an  avaricious  act."  1  But  the  successors  of  the 
Duke  went  even  further  than  he,  for  they  not  only  main- 
tained the  increased  rate  introduced  by  their  predecessor 
but  also  made  an  attempt  to  separate  land  from  the  "  other 
property  of  the  family "  and  to  impose  on  the  latter  a 
separate  tax.2  As  to  the  exact  nature  of  this  separate  tax 
on  "  the  other  property  of  the  family "  the  records  are 
silent.  But  it  undoubtedly  represents  an  attempt  to  extend 
the  land  tax  into  a  general  property  tax,  as  was  done  in 
most  countries.  Besides  raising  the  land  tax  the  dukes  of 
the  state  of  Lu  also  increased  the  other  services  that  were 
imposed  on  land.  Instead  of  requiring  sixty-four  tsing-tien 
or  "  nine-square-lots  "  to  furnish  four  horses,  twelve  oxen, 
one  chariot,  three  charioteers  and  seventy-two  foot-soldiers 
as  had  been  the  rule  in  the  past,  the  duke  now  required  six- 
teen tsing-tien  to  furnish  the  same  services,  a  fourfold  in- 
crease. 

1  Tung  Kao,  bk.  i,  f.  3.  *Ibid.,  f.  5. 


3oi  ]         FROM  THE  CH'IN  TO  THE  SUI  DYNASTY  33 

The  most  important  innovations  in  the  system  of  land 
distribution  and  taxation  were  to  be  found,  however,  in  the 
state  of  Ch'in  which  included  practically  the  same  territory 
as  the  modern  province  of  Shensi  and  afterwards  estab- 
lished the  Ch'in  dynasty,  the  first  centralized  empire  in 
China.  Duke  Shiao  and  his  minister  Shang  Yan  were 
both  ambitious  and  able  statesmen.  They  saw  that  the 
territory  of  Ch'in  was  extensive  and  thinly  populated 
while  that  of  the  neighboring  state,  Tsin,  was  small 
and  thickly  populated.  In  order  to  encourage  the  people 
of  Tsin  to  migrate  into  Ch'in  and  develop  the  country 
the  Duke  abolished  the  tsing-tien  system  and  allowed  the 
people,  native  as  well  as  immigrant,  to  take  up  as  much 
land  as  they  could  cultivate.  The  system  of  tsing-tien,  as 
Shang  Yan  told  his  Duke,  was  wasteful,  for  under  it  a 
large  part  of  the  field  had  to  be  set  aside  for  boundary  and 
road  purposes.  Furthermore  it  limited  the  full  utilization 
of  the  productive  labor  of  the  people.1  The  whole  system 
of  land  distribution  with  the  taxation  of  gross  produce  at 
the  rate  of  one-tenth,  which  had  existed  for  more  than  two 
thousand  years,  was  therefore  abolished  by  a  stroke  of  the 
pen.  With  the  abolition  of  the  system  of  communal  owner- 
ship, private  ownership  of  land  was  established.  Instead  of 
taxing  the  produce  of  communal  land,  the  land  was  now 
taxed  as  private  property.  Under  the  tsing-tien  system,  as 
pointed  out  by  Tu  Yu,  land  had  been  the  subject,  but  now  the 
owner  became  the  subject  of  the  tax.2 

When  in  221  B.  C.  Prince  Cheng  of  Ch'in  became  em- 
peror and  founded  the  Ch'in  dynasty  he  applied  the  new 
system  of  taxing  land  that  had  been  in  vogue  in  his  state  to 
the  whole  empire.  Feudalism  with  its  communal  owner- 

1  Classics,  vol.  v,  p.  329. 
8  Tung  Kao,  bk.  i,  f.  3. 


34  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [302 

ship  of  land  was  abolished  and  instead  of  parceling  out  the 
country  to  the  feudal  lords  he  now  divided  it  into  thirty-six 
provinces  with  subdivisions  known  as  hsien  or  districts 
which  have  survived  in  their  essential  character  to  this  day. 
The  provinces  as  well  as  the  districts  were  governed  by 
officials  directly  responsible  to  the  emperor.  With  the 
abolition  of  the  feudal  system  of  landholding  private 
property  in  land  was  established  throughout  the  entire 
Empire.  Land  could  now  be  bought  and  sold.  The 
sole  condition  of  land-holding  was  the  payment  of  a 
tax,  which  was  now  assessed  on  its  gross  produce.  The 
taxes  in  the  Ch'in  dynasty  were  heavy.  The  emperor 
was  an  ambitious  ruler.  It  was  he  who  undertook  the  erec- 
tion of  the  Great  Wall  and  the  construction  of  the  famous 
palaces.  It  was  he  who  for  the  first  time  in  the  history  of 
China  built  up  an  absolute  and  centralized  empire.  In  order 
to  meet  the  expenses  of  these  projects  taxes  were  greatly 
increased.  Just  how  heavy  the  taxes  on  land  were  during 
this  period  we  do  not  know.  It  was  recorded,  however, 
that  the  average  taxes  on  land,  on  "  mouths  "  (poll-tax) 
and  on  iron  and  salt  amounted  per  person  to  twenty  times 
as  much  as  in  the  earlier  part  of  Chow  dynasty  *  and  that 
the  amount  of  taxes  paid  in  service  (forced  labor)  was 
thirty  times  as  great.  In  the  preceding  dynasties  the  amount 
of  forced  labor  had  been  limited  to  three  days  per  year.  It 
was  now  increased  to  as  much  as  three  months.4  According 
to  the  record  the  emperor  employed  at  one  time  400,000  men 
in  building  the  Great  Wall,  500,000  in  defending  the  fron- 
tiers and  700,000  in  the  construction  of  his  palaces. 

The  result  of  these  changes  was  far-reaching.  There  now 
appeared  for  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  China  a  dis- 
tinction between  landowners  and  tenants.  On  account  of 
the  severity  of  taxes,  both  in  service  and  in  produce,  the 

1  History  of  Han  (Han  Shih),  vol.  xxiv,  f.  4.  *  Ibid. 


303]         FROM  THE  CH>IN  T0  THE  SUI  DYNASTY  35 

small  cultivators  gradually  sold  their  lands  to  the  rich  mer- 
chants and  wealthy  traders  who  now  became  1  great  land- 
lords. "  The  rich  own  thousands  of  mow  while  the  poor 
have  not  even  enough  land  for  an  awl  to  stand  on  "  is  a 
saying  that  has  come  down  to  us  from  the  Ch'in  dynasty. 
It  was  also  during  this  period  that  the  separation  of  the 
farming  population  from  the  soldiers  first  took  place  in 
China.  In  the  earlier  times  the  soldiers  were  drawn  from 
the  agrarian  population,  and  were  called  out  only  in  time  of 
need.  There  was  no  standing  army.  But  the  founder  of 
the  Ch'in  dynasty  in  order  to  maintain  his  power  created  a 
standing  army  which  was  drawn  chiefly  from  the  people  of 
his  state.  With  it  began  the  class  of  professional  soldiers 
in  China. 

The  Ch'in  dynasty  was  short-lived  and  was  soon  suc- 
ceeded by  the  Han  dynasty  (206  B.  C.-22O  A.  D.).  The 
system  of  land  taxation  introduced  may  be  characterized  as 
a  reaction  against  the  heavy  rates  which  had  obtained. 
Upon  his  accession  to  the  throne  the  founder  of  the  Han 
dynasty  immediately  reduced  the  rate  of  the  tax  to  one- 
fifteenth  of  the  gross  produce  and  the  amount  of  corvee  to 
three  days.  The  taxes  on  the  iron  and  salt  monopoly  which 
had  filled  a  minor  although  important  place  in  the  fiscal  sys- 
tem were  also  abolished.  In  the  reign  of  Emperor  Wen  (179- 
163  B.  C),  the  third  successor  of  the  founder  of  the  dynasty, 
the  reduction  of  taxes  was  carried  still  further.  Tiao 
Chu,  the  prime  miniser  of  the  emperor,  in  a  memorial  which 
is  considered  one  of  the  great  literary  productions  of  the 
time,  told  the  emperor  that  the  two  sources  of  production 
were  labor  and  land  and  that,  in  order  that  all  lands  capable 
of  producing  crops  might  be  cultivated  and  all  hands  engaged 

1  Tung  Kao,  bk.  i,  ff.  4-5. 
a  Tung  Kao,  bk.  x,  f.  10. 


36  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [304 

in  agriculture,  the  taxes  on  land  should  be  abolished.1  The 
revenue  hitherto  yielded  by  the  tax  could  be  obtained  by 
introducing  a  system  of  selling  official  titles  for  grain  and 
accepting  grain  for  the  remission  of  penalties.  This,  he 
pointed  out,  would  not  only  raise  the  necessary  revenue  but 
also  increase  the  value  of  grain,  which  would  further  encour- 
age the  development  of  agriculture.  Following  the  advice  of 
his  minister  the  emperor  abolished  the  land  taxes,  which 
were  not  resumed  for  twelve  years  until  after  his  death. 
The  rate  of  the  tax  on  land  in  the  first  period  of  the  Han 
dynasty  which  was  known  as  the  Eastern  Han  was  in  gen- 
eral very  light,  being  either  one-thirtieth  or  one-fifteenth  of 
the  gross  produce. 

Although  the  tax  was  light  during  this  period  the  con- 
dition of  the  farming  population  was  far  from  satisfactory, 
for  since  the  end  of  the  Chow  dynasty  most  of  the  land 
had  been  absorbed  by  the  great  landlords.  The  cultivators 
were  usually  tenants  and  had  to  pay  as  much  as  half  of 
their  produce  to  the  landowners.  This  gave  rise  to  a  good 
deal  of  discussion  among  the  writers  of  the  time  as  to 
whether  the  tsing-tien  system  could  be  revived  to  remedy 
the  situation.  In  the  reign  of  Emperor  Wu  ( 140134  B.  C.) 
Tung  Chung-shu,  the  emperor's  minister,  proposed  to  the 
emperor  that  if  the  tsing-tien  system  could  not  be  re-intro- 
duced, some  measure  of  limiting  landholding  was  necessary. 
Nothing  came  of  this  proposal,  however.  A  second  attempt 
was  made  by  Wang  Mang,  as  "  the  usurper,"  to  limit  the 
amount  of  individual  holdings.  When  he  came  to  the  throne 
he  issued  a  decree  declaring  that  every  family  of  less  than 
eight  persons  which  possessed  lands  amounting  to  more 
than  one  nine-square  lot  or  nine  hundred  mow  should  dis- 
tribute the  surplus  among  its  kinsmen  and  that  after  the 
distribution  land  should  be  non-transferable.  Although  the 

1  Han  Shih,  op.  clt.,  bk.  xxiv,  ff.  3-4. 


305]         FROM  THE  CH'IN  T0  THE  SUI  DYNASTY  37 

rate  of  the  land  tax  during  the  Han  dynasty  had  been  re- 
duced to  one-thirtieth  of  the  produce,  he  maintained,  the  cul- 
tivators of  the  soil  were  in  a  worse  condition  than  they  had 
been  in  the  past  when  the  rate  of  the  tax  was  one-tenth,  for 
now  they  had  to  pay  the  landlords  as  much  as  one-half  of 
the  produce,  while  in  the  past  they  had  to  pay  only  one- 
tenth  as  tax.  It  was  the  rich  landowners  that  were  benefited 
by  the  low  rates  of  the  tax.  The  situation  could  be  im- 
proved, he  maintained,  only  by  a  re-distribution  of  the  land. 
The  law,  however,  aroused  so  much  opposition  on  the  part 
of  the  people  that  its  author  was  obliged  to  repeal  it  after 
a  short  period  of  three  years. 

In  the  time  of  Emperor  Wu,  who  reigned  at  the  opening 
of  the  Christian  era,  a  survey  of  the  land  and  a  census  of 
the  population  were  taken.  The  survey  showed  that  there 
were  144,136,405  ching  of  land  within  the  empire.  Of  this 
amount  102,528,889  ching  were  said  to  be  occupied  by 
mountains,  streams,  roads,  etc.,  32,290,947  were  tillable  and 
one-fourth  of  these,  or  8,270,536,  were  then  actually  under 
cultivation.1  It  should  be  observed  that  the  unit  of  land 
measurement  used  by  the  Han  dynasty  was  different  from 
that  of  the  Chow  dynasty.  In  the  Chow  dynasty  one  hun- 
dred square  pu  was  declared  to  be  one  mow.  In  the  Han 
dynasty  two  hundred  and  forty  square  pu  instead  of  one 
hundred  square  pu  were  equal  to  one  mow.  One  mow  in 
the  Han  dynasty  was  therefore  equal  to  2.4  mow  of  the 
Chow  dynasty.  With  only  slight  changes  the  unit  of  land 
measurement  adopted  by  the  Han  dynasty  has  survived  to 
this  day.  The  census  taken  in  the  year  2  A.  D.  showed  that 
there  were  12,233,062  families  and  59,594,918  "mouths" 
in  the  Empire.2  These  figures  gave  an  average  amount  of 
land  cultivated  by  each  family  at  67.6  mow. 

1  Tung  Kao,  bk.  i,  f.  6. 

2  Ibid.,  bk.  x,  f .  12. 


38  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [306 

The  system  of  classifying  land  into  three  classes  accord- 
ing to  fertility,  introduced  in  the  Chow  dynasty,  seems  to 
have  fallen  into  disuse  in  the  first  part  of  the  Han  dynasty, 
for  in  no  record  have  we  found  any  mention  of  the  classifi- 
cation of  land.  The  basis  of  land  taxation  during  this 
period  was  probably  gross  produce.  The  system  of  classi- 
fication was,  however,  re-introduced  in  the  reign  of  Em- 
peror Chang  (75-84  A.  D.).  Land  was  classified,  as  in  the 
past,  into  three  classes  and  a  record  for  each  district  was 
kept  by  the  magistrate.  For  each  of  the  three  classes  a 
separate  rate  was  determined. 

The  land  tax  of  the  Han  dynasty  as  a  whole  was  light. 
But  besides  the  land  tax,  there  were  a  number  of  other 
levies  which  fell  mainly  on  the  produce  of  the  land,  although 
in  an  indirect  way.  There  was  also  a  capitation  tax 
levied  on  all  males.  The  rate  on  adults  (between  ages 
of  fifteen  and  sixty-five)  was,  with  occasional  reductions, 
and  remissions,  120  cash  per  annum.  The  rate  on  boys, 
(between  the  ages  of  seven  and  fifteen)  was  20  cash  per 
year.  There  was,  furthermore,  a  levy  in  service,  a  sur- 
vival of  the  ancient  corvee.  This  consisted  of  three  days' 
labor  and  was  commutable  at  the  rate  of  300  cash  per  man. 
At  one  time  there  was  also  introduced  a  "  door  tax  "  or 
family  tax  of  200  cash  per  family.  But  this  seems  not  to 
have  survived  any  length  of  time. 

The  taxes  on  land  were  invariably  assessed  in  produce, 
although  they  were  sometimes  paid  in  money.  But  toward 
the  end  of  the  dynasty  a  rate  of  20  cash  per  mow  was  im- 
posed by  Emperor  Hsuan  (147-150  A.  D.)  in  addition  to 
the  regular  levy  in  produce.  This  is  the  first  assessment  in 
cash  in  the  history  of  the  land  tax  in  China. 

The  system  of  land  tax  during  the  Han  dynasty  may  be 

1  Tung  Kao,  bk.  i,  f.  6. 
*  Ibid.,  bk.  x,  f.  12. 


307]         FROM  THE  CH'IN  TO  THE  SUI  DYNASTY  39 

characterized,  therefore,  as  a  reaction  against  the  heavy 
imposts  of  the  later  Chow  and  Ch'in  dynasties.  The  rates 
of  the  tax  were  as  a  whole  light  in  comparison  with  those 
of  the  previous  dynasties.  But  the  burden  of  main- 
taining the  state  was  by  no  means  lightened.  It  was 
only  shifted  from  the  land  to  the  person  in  the  form  of  a 
poll-tax  which  was  instituted  by  the  founder  of  the  dynasty, 
and  maintained,  with. only  occasional  remission  of  part  of 
the  rate,  throughout  the  period.  On  the  contrary,  the  con- 
dition of  the  agrarian  population  during  the  Han  dynasty 
was  not  as  good  as  in  the  Chow  dynasty  when  there  was  an 
equal  distribution  of  land  and  the  cultivators  usually  paid  no 
more  than  one-tenth  of  their  produce  toward  the  maintenance 
of  the  emperor  as  well  as  the  feudal  princes.  With  the  abo- 
lition of  the  feudal  system  of  land  holding  and  the  intro- 
duction of  the  institution  of  private  ownership  of  land  the 
cultivators  gradually  lost  their  land  which  began  to  be  con- 
centrated in  the  hands  of  a  small  class  of  owners.  A  landed 
aristocracy  arose.  The  literature  that  was  come  down 
to  us  from  this  period  abounds  with  exclamations  over  the 
tyranny  of  the  landed  aristocracy  and  the  misery  of  the 
landless  cultivators  who,  as  a  whole,  had  to  yield  as  much 
as  one-half  of  their  produce  to  the  landowners.  The  tax 
on  land  was  paid  by  the  owners,  so  that  the  low  rates,  ac- 
cording to  these  writers,  only  benefited  the  rich  landlords.1 
The  situation  was  aggravated  by  the  existence  of  the  capi- 
tation tax,  which  fell  mainly  on  the  poor  cultivators.  In  the 
reign  of  Emperor  Wu  (14088  B.  C.)  and  Emperor  Chen 
(32-6  B.  C.)  two  attempts  were  made  to  limit  the  holdings 
of  land  as  a  remedy  for  the  situation.  But  both  measures 
failed  to  go  through  as  the  government  was  then  in  the  hands 
of  the  landowners.2  When  Wang  Mang  (8-25  A.  D.)  came 

1Ho»S'AiA,bk.xxv,  f.  6. 
f  Tung  Kao,  bk.  i,  f.  6. 


40  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [308 

to  power  he  took  the  drastic  measure  of  proclaiming  that 
the  landholding  of  a  family  of  less  than  eight  could  not  ex- 
ceed one  hundred  mow.  The  measure  was  too  drastic  to 
be  carried  out  and  he  was  soon  obligated  to  revoke  it.  The 
situation  remained  practically  unaltered  until  the  end  of  the 
dynasty. 

After  the  fall  of  the  Han  dynasty  China  was  split  up  into 
three  sections  which  became  known  as  the  Three  Kingdoms. 
For  about  half  a  century  the  three  kingdoms  were  en- 
gaged in  a  struggle  for  supremacy.  Although  China  was 
united  again  under  the  Tsin  dynasty  (265-420  A.  D.)  the 
country  was  far  from  being  in  a  state  of  peace  and  pros- 
perity such  as  had  existed  in  the  Han  or  Chow  dynasties. 
The  government  was  weak  and  the  barbarians  from  the 
North  were  constantly  encroaching  upon  the  territory  of 
the  Chinese.  The  situation  became  still  worse  after  the  fall 
of  the  Tsin  dynasty,  although  it  had  exerted  only  a  nominal 
power  and  control  of  the  northern  part  of  China,  which 
now  became  divided  into  two  sections.  For  nearly  two 
hundred  years  China  was  the  scene  of  a  constant  struggle 
between  the  South  and  the  North  on  one  hand  and  between 
the  different  Chinese  dynasties  on  the  other.  It  was  a 
period  of  darkness,  as  some  Chinese  historians  call  it. 

During  these  years  of  chaos  and  confusion  a  considerable 
part  of  the  population,  including  the  great  landlords,  were 
destroyed.  Large  tracts  of  land  were  therefore  made 
ownerless.  The  period  was  characterized  by  attempts  on 
the  part  of  the  government  to  re-introduce  the  system  of 
equal  distribution  of  land  as  it  had  existed  in  the  Chow 
dynasty.  With  the  introduction  of  the  system  of  equal 
distribution  the  land  tax  became  merged  with  the  poll  tax. 
It  was  expanded  into  a  kind  of  general  property  tax  toward 
the  latter  part  of  the  period.  Some  of  the  characteristic 
features  of  the  system  as  it  existed  at  this  time  will  now  be 
briefly  discussed. 


309]         FROM  THE  CH'IN  TO  THE  SUI  DYNASTY  41 

The  system  of  land  distribution  and  taxation  introduced 
by  the  founder  of  the  Tsin  dynasty  provided  for  a  classifi- 
cation of  the  people  into  three  classes.  Men  and  women 
between  the  ages  of  sixteen  and  sixty  were  classified  as 
"  principal  citizens,"  those  between  thirteen  and  sixteen  and 
those  above  sixty  but  below  sixty-five  were  classified  as 
"  secondary  citizens,"  and  those  below  thirteen  or  above 
sixty-five  as  "  old  and  small."  Every  man  who  belonged 
to  the  first  class  was  entitled  to  receive  fifty  mow  of  land, 
the  first  one  in  the  family  being  allowed  twenty  additional 
mow,  and  every  woman  in  the  same  class,  twenty  mow  with 
an  additional  ten  mow  for  the  first  woman  member  in  the 
family.  Every  male  member  of  the  second  class  was  entitled 
to  receive  half  the  amount  or  twenty-five  mow,  the  female 
members  of  the  second  class  being  given  no  land.  Provisions 
were  also  made  for  the  nobility  and  state  officials,  who  were 
permitted  to  possess  from  seven  ching  to  fifty  ching  of  land 
according  to  their  rank,  one  ching  being  equal  to  one  hun- 
dred mow.  The  rate  of  the  tax,  or  rather  the  rent,  to  be 
paid  by  those  receiving  land  from  the  state  was  one-tenth 
of  the  produce,  which  was  fixed  at  three  sheng  of  rice  per 
mow.1  In  addition  to  the  land  tax  there  was  also  a  door 
or  family  tax  in  the  Tsin  dynasty.  The  family  tax,  as  we 
mentioned,  was  first  introduced  in  the  Han  dynasty,  al- 
though it  did  not  last  long.2  It  was  re-introduced  by  one 
of  the  Three  Kingdoms,  Wei,  in  the  form  of  two  pieces  of 
silk  of  a  given  kind  and  two  catties  of  cotton  per  family. 
The  tax  was  now  extended  to  the  whole  country  but  in- 
stead of  a  flat  rate  a  progressive  rate  was  adopted.  A 
household  that  had  a  member  belonging  to  the  first  class  of 
citizens  and  that  had  received  seventy  mow  of  land  was 
taxed  at  the  rate  of  three  lengths  of  silk  and  three  catties 

1  Supra,  p.  176. 

2  Tung  Kao,  bk.  ii,  ff.  10-11. 


42 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA 


of  cotton,  while  those  households  that  had  no  such  mem- 
ber were  liable  only  to  half  that  amount.  Families  that 
lived  on  the  frontier  districts  which  were  supposed  to  be 
less  wealthy  than  the  other  parts  of  the  empire  were  taxed 
at  rates  varying  from  one-third  to  one-half  the  rate  of  the 
other  families.  A  special  light  rate  was  also  provided  for 
aliens  who  at  that  time  were,  on  the  whole,  poorer  than  the 
natives.  The  principle  of  progression  as  applied  here  is  of 
course  in  its  crude  form.  But  the  system  undoubtedly  rep- 
resented a  distinct  attempt  on  the  part  of  the  government  to 
apportion  the  burden  of  supporting  the  state  among  the  tax- 
payers according  to  their  varying  degree  of  ability  to  pay 
taxes. 

The  system  of  land  distribution  was  further  elaborated 
by  the  Wei  dynasty  when  the  land  tax  was  expanded 
into  a  kind  of  general  property  tax.  Land  was  classified 
into  three  classes,  as  was  done  in  the  Chow  dynasty.  Every 
able-bodied  man  was  entitled  to  possess  fifty  mow  of  the 
best  class  of  land  or  one  hundred  of  the  second  class  or 
one  hundred  and  fifty  of  the  third  class.  For  every  slave 
or  ox  an  additional  thirty  mow  was  allowed,  provided  the 
additional  allowance  did  not  exceed  four  units  or  one  hun- 
dred and  twenty  mow,  and  for  every  woman  in  the  family 
above  the  age  of  fifteen  twenty  more  mow  were  allowed. 
The  land  thus  granted  was  non-  transferable  and  reverted 
to  the  state  when  the  recipient  died  or  the  slave  was  sold. 
People  on  the  frontiers  where  land  was  abundant  were  per- 
mitted to  take  up  as  much  land  as  they  could  cultivate.  In 
addition  to  this  non-transferable  land,  every  man  was  given 
twenty  mow  of  land  for  the  cultivation  of  mulberry  trees 
or  flax,  which  he  was  permitted  to  retain  as  his  perma- 
nent possession.  The  unit  selected  for  purposes  of  the 
tax  imposed  on  the  recipient  of  public  land  was  the 
married  couple  who  were  taxed  at  the  rate  of  one  piece 


3IIJ         FROM  THE  CH'IN  TO  THE  SUI  DYNASTY  43 

of  silk  of  a  given  kind  and  two  shih  of  rice.  For  every 
slave  the  owner  was  taxed  at  the  rate  of  one-eighth  of 
the  amount  paid  by  one  married  couple  and  for  every  ox 
one-twentieth  the  amount.1  The  extent  to  which  this 
elaborate  system  of  land  distribution  and  taxation  was 
carried  out  is  not  known.  The  important  point  to  note 
here  is  that  it  was  during  this  period  that  attempts  were 
made  to  reach  property  other  than  the  land.  Moreover, 
since  slaves  and  oxen  were  the  most  important  forms  of 
wealth  in  addition  to  land,  the  tax  as  introduced  by  the  Wei 
dynasty  may  be  called  a  general  property  tax.  The  system 
as  described  above  was  most  probably  not  carried  out  to  any 
great  extent,  for  in  the  reign  of  Emperor  Chung  another 
law  was  passed  providing  for  a  classification,  of  the  house- 
holds into  nine  classes  according  to  their  wealth,  and  a  dif- 
ferential rate  of  general  tax  was  imposed  on  families  of 
each  class.2 

The  systems  of  taxation  in  the  other  dynasties  of  this 
period,  most  of  which  were  short-lived,  are  similar  to  those 
of  the  Tsin  or  the  Wei  dynasties.  They  need  not  be  dis- 
cussed further  than  to  point  out  that  they  were  all  charac- 
terized by  attempts,  more  or  less  successful,  at  a  redistribu- 
tion of  the  land,  while  the  taxes  on  land  were  largely  merged 
with  the  poll  tax  and  the  family  tax.  Innovations  in  regard 
to  the  amount  of  land  distributed  as  well  as  to  the  manner 
and  the  rate  of  taxes  imposed  were  many,  but  most  of  them 
were  of  a  transitory  character.  It  was  not  until  the  Tang 
dynasty,  when  the  country  was  again  brought  under  the  con- 
trol of  a  strong  and  stable  government,  that  the  laws  gov- 
erning taxing  the  land  received  any  permanent  character. 

1  Tung  Kao,  bk.  ii,  ff.  12-13. 
'•'Ibid.,  f.  12. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE  LAND  TAX  FROM  THE  TANG  DYNASTY  TO  THE  MING 

DYNASTY 

IN  the  two  preceding  chapters  the  development  of  the 
land  tax  from  the  early  times  to  the  close  of  the  Sui  dynasty 
has  been  discussed.  Roughly  speaking,  the  development  of 
the  land  tax  prior  to  Tsing  dynasty  may  be  said  to  divide 
itself  into  three  periods.  The  first  period  is  characterized 
by  a  f eudalistic  system  of  landholding,  extending  from  the 
earliest  time  to  the  fall  of  the  Chow  dynasty  (2697-249 
B.  C.).  The  feudal  system  of  landholding  was  an  out- 
growth of  the  tribal  period.  It  existed  during  the  Hsia  and 
the  Shang  dynasties  and  reached  its  height  of  development 
in  the  Chow  dynasty.  During  this  period  land  was  held  not 
to  belong  to  the  individuals  but  to  the  community  at  large; 
and  the  general  principle  of  taxation  was  that  of  the  tithe. 
With  the  consolidation  of  the  feudal  states  and  the  growth 
of  the  power  of  the  central  government  the  principle  of 
communal  ownership  gradually  gave  place  to  that  of  private 
property  which  was  finally  recognized  with  the  establish- 
ment of  the  Ch'in  dynasty.  The  Ch'in  dynasty,  the  first 
centralized  empire  in  China,  ushered  in  the  second  period 
(249  B.  C.-6i8  A.  D.)  during  which  the  system  of  taxa- 
tion was  based  on  the  principle  of  individual  ownership  and 
land  was  taxed  as  the  private  property  of  the  owners.  But 
toward  the  latter  part  of  this  period  various  attempts  were 
made  to  re-introduce  the  ancient  system  of  land  distribu- 
tion. These  attempts  were  due  mainly  to  the  abuses  of  the 
concentration  of  land  in  the  hands  of  a  class  of  large  land- 
44  .  [312 


313]       FROM  THE  TANG  TO  THE  MING  DYNASTY  45 

owners  during  the  first  part  of  the  period  and  to  the  destruc- 
tion of  these  large  landowners  during  the  latter  part  of  the 
period  when  confusion  and  wars  were  prevalent.  With  the 
establishment  of  the  Tang  dynasty  began  the  third  period, 
extending  from  618  A.  D.  to  the  close  of  the  Ming  dynasty 
in  1 66 1 .  During  the  first  part  of  the  Tang  dynasty  the  reac- 
tionary movement  which  aimed  to  restore  the  system  of 
equal  distribution  of  land  was  finally  brought  to  an  end  and 
a  general  tax  on  land,  combined  with  the  poll  and  household 
taxes,  was  introduced.  This  chapter  will  discuss  these  two 
systems  of  taxing  the  land  in  the  Tang  dynasty  and  will 
trace  its  further  development  in  the  succeeding  dynasties. 
It  is  to  this  period  that  many  of  the  characteristic  features 
of  the  present  system  of  taxing  land  are  traceable. 

The  two  systems  of  taxation  for  which  the  Tang  dynasty 
is  noted  are  known  as  the  system  of  tsu-yun<-tiao  (rent,  per- 
sonal-service and  household  tax)  and  the  system  of  liang- 
shui  (two  levies).  The  system  of  rent,  personal-service, 
and  household  tax  is  based  on  the  principle  of  equal  distri- 
bution of  land,  as  we  have  already  mentioned.  Under  this 
system  every  husbandman  was  entitled  to  receive  one  hun/- 
dred  mow  of  land,  eighty  mow  of  which  were  revertable 
to  the  government,  while  the  other  twenty  mow,  which  were 
used  for  the  cultivation  of  mulberry  or  flax  trees,  could  be 
retained  as  the  permanent  possession  of  the  cultivator.1 
Land  was  classified,  as  in  the  past,  into  three  classes.  In 
the  case  of  land  which  was  tillable  every  other  year  the  in- 
dividual was  given  twice  the  amount  and  in  the  case  where 
land  was  tillable  only  every  third  year  the  grant  per  indi- 
vidual was  three  times  as  much  or  three  hundred  mow. 
This  rule  applied,  however,  only  to  the  villages  where  land 
was  abundant  and  sufficient  to  give  every  cultivator  the  full 
quota.  In  case  of  villages  where  land  was  not  sufficient  the 

1  Vide  Tang  Shih  (General  History  of  Tang  Dynasty},  vol.  1,  ff.  1-2. 


46  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA 

cultivator  was  given  half  the  amount.  He  might,  however, 
receive  the  full  quota  if  he  moved  to  the  village  where  there 
was  an  abundance  of  land.  This  arrangement,  of  course,  had 
a  tendency  to  equalize  the  distribution  of  the  population.  It 
is  not  our  purpose  here  to  go  into  a  detailed  discussion  of 
this  system  of  land  distribution,  which  was  perhaps  better 
developed  than  in  any  of  the  preceding  dynasties  after  Chow. 
Suffice  it  to  point  out  here  that  it  must  have  been  carried 
out  very  fully  for  "  it  was  ascertained  that  in  the  twenty- 
eighth  year  of  Kai  Yuan  (713  A.  D.)  the  area  of  land 
allotted  to  the  people  was  14,403,863  ching."  *  Under  this 
system  of  distribution  every  cultivator  was  required  to  pay 
to  the  government  two  hao  each  of  wheat  or  rice  as  tsu  or 
rent ;  twenty  days  of  labor,  with  two  days  in  addition  for  the 
intercalary  month,  as  yun  or  service ;  and  a  certain  amount 
of  silks  or  cloth  as  tiao  or  household-tax ; 2  hence  the  name 
rent,  personal-service  and  housetold  tax.  The  personal  ser- 
vice was  commutable  at  the  rate  of  three  feet  of  silk  of  a 
certain  specification  per  day.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the  ser- 
vice required  of  a  man  should  exceed  twenty-five  days  per 
year  he  would  be  exempted  from,  the  household  tax,  and  if 
it  exceeded  thirty  days  he  would  be  exempted  both  from  the 
household  tax  and  rent  payment.  The  law  also  provided 
that  in  no  case  should  the  service  required  of  any  individual 
exceed  fifty  days  in  the  year.3  A  system  of  remission  and 
exemption  was  also  carefully  provided  in  the  statutes.  The 
taxpayer  could  claim  exemption  from  the  payment  of  the 
rent  when  his  crop  was  devastated  by  drought,  frost,  locusts 
or  other  cause  beyond  his  control  to  such  an  extent  that  his 
crop  was  reduced  to  one-fourth ;  from  the  payment  of  both 

1  Land  Measurement  in   China,  ch.  iv,   sec.   i;   cf.   also   Tung  Kaof 
bk.  iii,  f.  15. 

*  General  History  of  Tang  Dynasty,  above  cited,  vol.  li,  f.  2. 
*Ibid. 


3 1 5]       FROM  THE  TANG  TO  THE  MING  DYNASTY  47 

the  rent  and  the  house-tax  when  the  crop  dropped  to  one- 
sixth  ;  and  from  all  the  three  levies  when  it  failed  to  produce 
more  than  one-seventh  of  its  normal  yield. 

The  system  of  taxation  applied,  however,  only  to  the  agra- 
rian population  of  the  country.  The  nobility,  the  state  offi- 
cials, the  scholars,  filial  sons  and  the  faithful  widows  were  all 
exempted  from  it.  It  may  be  of  interest  to  note  that  there 
was  during  this  time  a  progressive  income  tax  on  the  mer- 
chants. The  rate  of  the  tax  was  graduated,  varying  in  nine 
steps  from  five  tao  to  five  shih  of  grain  according  to  the  size 
of  the  income  from  the  business.1 

That  such  a  system  of  taxation  would  require  very  minute 
regulation  and  supervision  is  evident.  For  the  purposes  of 
administration  an  elaborate  machinery  was  provided  by  the 
founder  of  the  dynasty.  Provisions  were  made  for  the  an- 
nual collection  of  statistics  on  population,  land  and  crops, 
and  for  the  taking  of  a  general  census  every  third  year. 
But  as  time  went  on  and  the  power  of  the  central  govern- 
ment waned  the  system  gradually  broke  down.  Lands  began 
to  be  bought  and  sold,  their  reversion  to  the  state  being  no 
longer  enforced.  The  old  survey  books  and  the  tax-rolls 
which  were  originally  renewed  at  frequent  intervals  were 
allowed  to  become  obsolete.  Large  areas  of  land  began  to 
be  concentrated  in  the  hands  of  the  rich,  while  they  con- 
tinued to  pay  only  the  same  amount  in  taxes  as  the  landless 
cultivators.  The  situation  was  aggravated  by  the  destruc- 
tive rebellions  which  broke  out  in  the  middle  of  the  dynasty, 
for  these  necessitated  the  imposition  of  a  number  of  extra 
levies  which  fell  mainly  on  the  agrarian  populace.  The  sit- 
uation was  worse,  according  to  a  contemporary  writer,  than 
that  of  the  latter  part  of  Han  dynasty.  The  government 
suffered  great  decrease  of  revenue  and  the  people  intoler- 
able misery.2 

1  General  History  of  Tang  Dynasty,  vol.  K.  f.  4. 
*  Tung  Kao,  bk.  iii,  ff.  15-16. 


48  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [316 

This  situation  led  to  the  famous  tax  reforms  of  Yang 
Yen  in  780.  Recognizing  that  the  old  system  of  three  levies 
which  was  based  on  the  assumption  of  an  equal  distribution 
of  land  had  completely  broken  down,  Yang  Yen  replaced 
the  three  levies  and  the  other  subsidiary  taxes,  which  had 
been  imposed  one  after  another,  by  a  single  general  tax  on 
land.  The  new  tax  was  made  payable  in  two  instalments, 
one  in  summer  and  one  in  autumn,  hence  the  name  "  sum- 
mer and  autumn  levies."  Under  the  system  of  three  levies 
the  basis  of  the  tax,  as  pointed  by  the  reformer  himself, 
was  the  person,  the  cultivator  of  the  soil  who  was  assumed 
to  possess  an  amount  of  land  equal  to  that  of  every  other 
person  and  hence  equal  ability  to  pay  taxes.  But  this 
assumption  was  not  true.  The  people  no  longer  possessed 
equal  amounts  of  land  and  to  impose  a  uniform  rate  on  the 
basis  of  the  person  or  household  was  most  unjust.  Under 
the  new  system  land  itself  was  therefore  made  the  subject 
of  taxation.  "  People  were  now  taxed  not  according  to 
their  age — whether  able  to  cultivate  land  or  not — but  ac- 
cording to  their  wealth  or  the  amount  of  the  land  pos- 
sessed." 1  The  old  three-fold  classification  was  re-intro- 
duced and  in  each  of  the  three  classes  a  general  rate  was 
fixed  payable  in  two  instalments.  The  rate  of  the  first 
instalment  which  was  payable  in  the  sixth  month  varied 
from  one  tao  of  grain  on  the  best  land,  six-tenths  of  a  tao  on 
the  second  class  and  two-tenths  on  the  third  class.  The  rate 
of  the  second  instalment  which  was  payable  in  the  eleventh 
month  varied  from  two-tenths  on  the  third  class  to  five- 
tenths  of  a  tao  on  the  first  class  of  land.  This  system  of 
taxation  is  of  course  crude,  judged  by  modern  standards, 
but  compared  with  the  outgrown  system  which  imposed  an 
approximately  equal  rate  of  tax  on  all  cultivators  of  soil  it 

1  Tung  Kao,  bk.  iii,  f.  16. 


FROM  THE  TANG  TO  THE  MING  DYNASTY 


49 


marked  a  substantial  advance  and  was  rightly  hailed  by  the 
people  of  the  time  as  a  great  reform.1 

Besides  changing  the  nature  of  the  base  and  simplify- 
ing the  system,  Yang  Yen  introduced  the  important  prin- 
ciple of  apportionment.  Heretofore,  whatever  the  system 
of  taxing  land,  the  rate  of  the  tax  was  fixed  subject  only  to 
occasional  reduction  or  remission  in  case  of  crop  failure. 
"  Instead  of  adjusting  the  expenditure  of  the  state  to  the 
returns  of  the  taxes,  the  chief  one  of  which  was  of  course 
the  land  tax,  Yang  Yen  first  determined  the  amount  of  ex- 
penditure and  then  apportioned  the  required  amount  among 
the  districts  according  to  the  assessed  value  of  the  four- 
teenth year  of  the  reign  of  Tai-Lieh  (775)."  2  The  general 
rates  which  were  mentioned  in  the  foregoing  page  were 
therefore  subject  to  increase  or  decrease  according  to  the 
needs  of  the  government.  This  principle  of  assigning  a 
definite  quota  to  each  of  the  territorial  divisions  of  the  coun- 
try, leaving  the  actual  determination  of  the  rates  to  the  local 
authorities,  as  will  be  seen  later,  survived,  at  least  in  theory, 
to  the  last  day  of  the  Tsing  dynasty.8 

Beside  reforming  the  land  tax  Yang  Yen  also  introduced 
a  classified  progressive  income  tax.  During  the  first  part  of 
the  dynasty  the  merchants,  as  we  have  mentioned,  were  sub- 
ject to  an  income  tax  of  from  five  tao  to  five  shih  of  grain. 
The  tax  was  now  expanded  into  a  general  income  tax  appli- 
cable to  the  nobles,  and  the  officials  as  well  as  the  merchants.  * 
The  rate  of  the  tax  varied  according  to  the  class  of  house- 
hold. First-class  households  paid  the  highest  sum,  4000 
cash  per  annum.  Each  successive  lower  class  paid  500  cash 
less  until  the  amount  was  1000  cash  for  the  seventh  class. 

1  Chu  Tang  Shih  (Old  History  of  Tang  Dynasty"),  bk.  xlviii,  f.  3. 
9  Tang  Shih,  op.  cit.,  vol.  li,  f.  5. 

3  Cf.  infra,  p.  128. 

4  Old  History  of  Tang  Dynasty,  op.  cit.,  vol.  xlviii,  f.  3. 


50  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [318 

Seven  hundred  was  the  charge  on  the  eighth  and  500  on  the 
ninth  class.  These  reforms  were  received,  according  to  Ma 
Tuan-li,  with  great  satisfaction  by  the  people.1  The  annual 
receipts  after  the  reforms  were,  according  to  the  records  of 
the  reign  of  Ti-Chang  (780904),  in  round  numbers  20,- 
000,000  strings  of  cash  and  4,000,000  hao  of  rice  for  the 
provincial  government  and  9,500,000  strings  of  cash  and 
6,000,000  hao  of  rice  for  the  central  government.2 

After  the  fall  of  the  Tang  dynasty  China  went  through  a 
period  of  confusion  and  disorder.  Within  the  brief  span  of 
fifty  years  there  rose  and  fell  in  rapid  succession  no  less 
than  five  dynasties.  It  was  during  this  period,  which  is 
known  in  the  Chinese  history  as  the  Epoch  of  Five  Dynas- 
ties, that  the  practice  was  introduced  of  imposing  extra  rates 
under  the  pretext  of  covering  wastage  and  meltage  ex- 
penses. This  became,  as  will  be  shown,  one  of  the  most  be- 
wildering features  of  the  land  tax  system  of  the  Tsing 
dynasty.3  After  this  period  of  confusion  the  country  was 
put  under  a  stable  government  again  when  Sung  dynasty 
(960-1277)  came  to  power. 

Besides  abolishing  the  numerous  extra  levies  of  the  Five 
Dynasties,  the  founder  of  Sung  introduced  several  impor- 
ant  changes  in  the  system  of  taxation.  Perhaps  the  most 
important  of  these  was  the  division  of  all  arable  lands  in 
the  country  into  lots  of  one  thousand  pu  square,  each  lot 
thus  containing  41  ching,  66  mow  and  160  square  pu*  and 
the  classification  of  the  land  into  five  classes.  The  classifi- 
cation was  later  expanded  into  ten.  On  each  of  the  classes 
a  rate  was  imposed,  based  on  the  gross  produce  of  the  land. 
The  tax  was  payable,  as  in  the  later  Tang  dynasty,  in  two 

1  Tung  Kao,  bk.  iii,  f.  15. 

a  Tung  Kao,  bk.  iii,  f.  15  or  Land  Measurement  in  China,  ch.  iv,  sec.  iv. 

*  Tung  Kao,  bk.  iv,  passim. 

4  General  History  of  Tang  Dynasty,  bk.  clxxiv,  f .  i. 


319]       FROM  THE  TANG  TO  THE  MING  DYNASTY  51 

instalments.  As  a  whole,  the  rate  of  the  land  tax  during 
Sung  was  light,  amounting  to  from  one-twentieth  to  one- 
thirtieth  of  the  gross  produce.1 

Another  important  principle  introduced  by  this  dynasty 
was  the  differentiation  of  land  into  public  land,  farming 
land  and  urban  land.  The  receipts  from  these  three  kinds 
of  land  formed  the  first  three  of  the  five  classes  into  which 
the  revenues  of  the  government  were  divided.  The  five 
classes  of  revenues  were  (i)  rents  from  public  land  culti- 
vated by  tenants,  (2)  taxes  from  farming  land,  (3)  taxes 
from  urban  land  used  for  buildings,  (4)  poll  tax,  and  (5) 
miscellaneous  taxes.  The  public  lands  at  that  time  were  ex- 
tensive, no  less  than  one-seventh  of  the  cultivated  land  of 
the  Empire  belonging  to  the  government. 

During  the  Sung  dynasty  the  land  tax  was  collected  in  a 
great  variety  of  commodities.  In  1021,  for  example,  the 
taxes  collected  included  31,707,000  shih  of  grain,  4,656,000 
strings  of  cash,  1,898,000  pieces  of  silk,  282,000  pieces  of 
cotton  cloth,  5,170,000  taels  of  cotton,  300,000  catties  of 
iron,  490,000  catties  of  tea,  as  well  as  numerous  other  items. 
It  was  not  until  the  reign  of  Sin-Chung  (1068-1086)  that 
silver  was  used  for  the  payment  of  taxes. 

In  addition  to  the  modified  land  tax,  the  Sung  dynasty 
instituted  a  tax  on  the  transfer  of  land,  either  by  sale,  in- 
heritance or  gift,  and  a  general  property  tax.  The  rate  of 
the  tax  on  transfer  of  land  varied  from  three  to  five  per 
cent.  This  tax  must  have  been  levied  extensively,  for  in 
the  fifth  year  of  Kuo-Oiung  (1132)  the  receipts  from  this 
source  amounted  to  over  four  and  one-half  million  strings 
of  cash.2  The  general  property  tax  was  introduced  by  the 
great  financier  Wang  An  Shih.  It  was  a  graduated,  clas- 
sified tax  based  on  land  and  other  properties.  Land,  conse- 

1  Ibid.,  bk.  clxxiv,  f .  4. 

3  General  History  of  Tang  Dynasty,  bk.  clxxiv,  f.  7. 


52  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [320 

quently,  was  subject  to  the  regular  land  rate  as  well  as  to 
the  general  property  tax.  The  latter,  however,  rested  most 
heavily  on  the  wealthy  classes. 

The  system  of  taxation  of  the  Yuan  dynasty  which  suc- 
ceeded Sung  can  be  discussed  very  briefly.  It  was  substan- 
tially a  combination  of  the  two  noted  systems  of  the  Tang 
dynasty.  In  the  southern  provinces  the  system  of  levying  a 
summer  and  an  autumn  tax  was  retained.  The  autumn  tax 
was  generally  paid  in  copper  cash  and  the  summer  tax  in 
produce,  cotton,  silk  and  grain.1  In  the  northern  provinces 
where  the  Mongols  gained  a  firmer  control  of  the  situation 
there  was  levied,  in  addition  to  the  land  tax,  a  progressive 
poll  tax,  the  rate  of  which  varied  from  one-quarter  of  one 
shih  of  grain  to  an  entire  shih.  The  poll  tax  might  be  more 
truly  termed  a  property  tax,  for  the  rate  of  the  tax  to  be 
imposed  on  the  individual  was  determined  "  according  to 
the  kind  of  implements,  number  of  oxen  employed,  and  the 
fertility  of  the  soil  under  his  cultivation."  As  to  the  land 
tax  proper,  the  old  three-fold  classification  was  retained. 
But  instead  of  the  multiplicity  of  articles  receivable  for 
taxes  in  the  Sung  dynasty,  grain  and  silver  were  the  com- 
modities mainly  used  for  this  purpose  during  this  period. 
The  annual  returns  for  the  first  year  of  Wei-Chung  (1328) , 
for  example,  consisted  of  12,114,699  shih  of  grain  and 
149,273  shoes  of  silver  sycee. 

During  the  first  part  of  the  Ming  dynasty  (1368-1644) 
the  system  of  taxation  was  practically  the  same  as  that  of 
Sung  or  the  later  Tang  dynasties.  Land  was  divided  into 
private  and  public  land:  the  latter  formed  a  considerable 
portion  of  the  cultivated  area  of  the  country,  perhaps  as 
much  as  one-sixth.2  The  old  three-fold  classification  with 

1  Land  Measurement  in  China,  ch.  vi. 

*Tung  Kao  (Continuation},  bk.  i,  f.  8;  Land  Measurement,  ch.  iv, 
sec.  ii. 
1  Ibid.,  sec.  iii. 


32 1  ]       FROM  THE  TANG  TO  THE  MING  DYNASTY  53 

three  subdivisions  for  each  of  the  three  classes  was  retained. 
During  the  first  part  of  the  dynasty  the  tax  was  paid  in 
silk,  grain,  copper  cash,  and  silver  sycee  as  in  the  preced- 
ing dynasties.  But  toward  the  latter  part  of  the  period 
silver  began  to  be  used  more  and  more  extensively  as  pay- 
ment of  the  tax.  By  the  time  of  Emperor  Chin-Tung 
(1436-1450)  silver  became  the  chief  commodity  in  the  pay- 
ment of  the  land  tax.  A  definite  rate  of  converting  the  grain 
payment  in  which  the  tax  was  assessed  into  silver  was  fixed 
at  one  tael  of  silver  to  four  shih  of  grain.  Commutation 
first  took  place  in  the  provinces  south  of  Yangtze,  and  was 
gradually  extended  throughout  the  Empire. 

Tax  conditions  during  the  first  half  of  the  Ming  dynasty 
were,  as  a  whole,  satisfactory.  But  after  the  middle  of  the 
fifteenth  century  the  country  was  much  disturbed.  The  tax- 
roll  which  was  compiled  by  the  founder  of  the  dynasty  and 
became  known  as  the  "  fish-scale  register  "  (a  term  derived 
from  the  appearance  of  the  pages  of  the  book)  was  allowed! 
to  become  obsolete.  Extra  levies  were  imposed  one  after  the 
other  until  the  reign  of  Sin-Chung  (1573-1620),  by  which 
time  the  situation  had  become  so  bad  that  reform  could  no 
longer  be  put  off.  The  regular  land  tax  with  the  various 
extra  charges  were  now  consolidated  into  one  single  payment 
known  as  i-tiao-pien  or  "  single  whip,"  a  term  which  carries 
with  it  interesting  evidence  of  the  burdensomeness  of  the 
tax  on  the  people.  Nevertheless,  the  "  single  whip  "  was 
considered  a  reform,  for,  compared  with  the  numerous  vex- 
atious levies  which  it  replaced,  it  was  certainly  a  step  in 
advance. 

The  improvement,  however,  proved  to  be  short-lived. 
Lawlessness  and  disorder  increased  more  and  more,  neces- 
sitating the  levy  of  additional  rates.  Chief  among  these 
extra  levies  were  the 'so-called  "three  supplies,"  consisting 
of  the  so-called  "  Liaottmg  supply  "  levied  for  the  increased 


54  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [322 

military  expenditure  of  Liaotung  where  the  activities  of  the 
Manchus  were  threatening  the  safety  of  the  empire,  the 
"  training  supply  "  for  new  soldiers,  and  the  "  suppression 
supply  "  for  suppressing  the  disorders  of  the  country.  The 
weight  of  these  taxes  caused  widespread  dissatisfaction  and 
confusion,  and  finally  led  to  the  downfall  of  the  dynasty. 
This  completes  the  survey  of  the  development  of  the  tax 
prior  to  the  Tsing  dynasty. 


PART   II 

THE  LAND  TAX  SINCE  THE  TSING 
DYNASTY 


CHAPTER  IV 
THE  LAND  POLICY 

IN  the  foregoing  pages  we  have  traced  the  development 
of  the  system  of  the  land  tax  from  earliest  times  to  the  close 
of  the  Ming  dynasty,  covering  a  period  of  no  less  than 
three  thousand  years.  In  this  brief  survey  we  have  noted 
the  more  interesting  and  important  features  of  the  systems 
of  land  tenure  and  taxation  of  the  different  dynasties.  An 
attempt  will  now  be  made  to  discuss  in  greater  detail  the 
development  and  the  nature  of  the  tax  as  it  existed  during 
the  Tsing  dynasty,  for  the  conditions  of  the  land  tax  to- 
day are  substantially  the  same  as  they  were  during  that 
period.  But  in  order  to  understand  fully  the  whole  system 
of  land  taxation  in  China  a  discussion  of  the  various 
tenures  under  which  land  was  held  and  taxed  and  the  policy 
of  the  government  toward  the  distribution  and  taxation  of 
land  will  be  necessary.  A  brief  treatment  of  each  of  these 
topics  will  therefore  be  given  before  taking  up  the  discus- 
sion of  the  tax  itself. 

Recognizing  agriculture  as  the  basis  of  her  national  econ- 
omy the  policy  of  China  toward  land  has  always  been  to  bring 
as  much  of  the  land  under  cultivation  as  possible.  To  this 
the  policy  of  the  Manchu  dynasty  constituted  no  exception. 
As  soon  as  the  Manchus  gained  control  of  the  country  they 
turned  their  attention  to  the  development  of  agriculture  and 
the  problem  of  land  which  they  recognized  was  the  basis  of 
the  people's  subsistence  and  the  source  of  the  government's 
revenue.  During  the  prolonged  period  of  war  which  pre- 
325]  57 


58  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [326 

ceded  the  establishment  of  the  dynasty,  a  large  part  of  the 
country  was  laid  waste,  and  a  considerable  portion  of  the 
population  was  destroyed.  The  immediate  problem  of  the 
government  was  then  to  restore  the  abandoned  and  devas- 
tated lands  to  cultivation  and  to  increase  the  population. 

To  increase  the  population  and  to  extend  the  area  of  cul- 
tivation were  not,  however,  peculiar  problems  of  that  time. 
They  were  the  ends  for  which  the  statesmen  and  emperors 
of  the  past  have  been  working.  The  size  of  the  population 
and  the  extent  of  cultivation  were  looked  upon  as  sure  in- 
dices of  the  justice  of  the  ruler  and  of  the  prosperity  of  the 
age.  To  achieve  these  two  results  proved  therefore  to  be 
not  only  the  immediate  problem  but  also  the  object  of  the 
general  policy  of  the  dynasty  toward  agriculture  and  land. 

This  chapter  is  addressed  to  the  discussion  of  some  of  the 
methods  which  the  Manchu  government  adopted  in  carry- 
ing out  this  policy  which  has  played  a  very  important  role 
in  the  economic  history  of  the  country  during  the  last  three 
hundred  years.  The  methods  outlined  in  the  following 
pages  are  based  upon  a  study  and  analysis  of  the  decrees, 
laws,  memorials  and  other  official  documents  of  the  dynasty.1 

Perhaps  the  most  obvious  and  important  step  which  the 
government  took  in  extending  the  area  of  cultivation  was 
to  give  lands  free  to  the  people.  It  has  already  been  ob- 
served that  during  the  years  of  struggle  between  the  Ming 
dynasty  and  the  incoming  Manchus  large  tracts  of  land 
were  laid  waste.  When  order  was  restored  these  abandoned 
and  ownerless  lands  were  given  to  cultivators  free  except  in 
the  more  populous  provinces,  such  as  Shantung  and  Honan, 
where  a  nominal  price  was  charged.  The  amount  of  the 

1  These  documents  are  found  chiefly  in  Ta  Tsing  Hwei  Tien;  Ta  Tsing 
Hwei  Tien  Shih  Li;  Huang  Tiao  Tung  Tien;  Huang  Tiao  Tung  Chih 
and  Huang  Tiao  Wen  Hsien  Tung  Kau.  For  an  English  translation 
of  the  names  of  these  books  cf.  infra,  pp.  173-174. 


327]  THE  LAND  POLICY  59 

grant  to  each  family  was  almost  invariably  limited.  For 
example,  in  Szechuan,  which  perhaps  suffered  the  greatest 
devastation  during  the  struggle  between  the  Ming  dynasty 
and  the  incoming  Manchus,  the  grant  was  limited  to  thirty 
mow  of  irrigated  land  and  fifty  mow  of  dry  land  for 
each  family,  with  an  additional  grant  of  half  the  amount  for 
every  able-bodied  member  of  the  family.1  Additional 
allowance  was  also  made  for  families  which  had  a  large 
number  of  aged  or  young  dependents.  In  Shensi,  which 
was  then  rather  thinly  populated  and  into  which  people 
from  other  provinces  were  encouraged  to  migrate,  the  grant 
was  limited  to  fifty  mow  of  fertile  land,  or  one  hundred 
mow  of  ordinary  land  with  the  same  rate  of  allowance  as 
in  Szechuan  and  the  same  provision  for  dependents.  Simi- 
larly, people  in  the  populous  provinces  were  encouraged  to 
migrate  into  the  western  and  northwestern  provinces  to 
take  up  lands. 

Another  important  condition  imposed  on  land  thus  taken 
up  by  the  cultivators  was  that  the  grantee  must  bring  the 
land  under  immediate  cultivation.  The  title  of  the  land 
remained  with  the  government  until  the  lapse  of  three  years 
in  the  case  of  irrigated  lands  and  six  years  in  the  case  of 
dry  lands,  and  until  title  passed  taxation  on  the  land  did  not 
begin.  In  other  words,  the  land  was  held  provisionally  for 
a  period  of  years  during  which  the  government,  theoretically 
at  least,  could  revoke  the  grant.  This  policy  of  limiting  the 
amount  of  grants  and  requiring  the  grantee  to  bring  the 
land  under  cultivation  before  he  could  claim  title  made 
speculation  difficult 2  and  contributed  in  no  small  measure 
to  bringing  about  the  system  of  small  holdings  in  China. 

Besides  giving  lands  to  the  cultivators  free  the  govern- 
ment also  gave  subsidies  in  the  way  of  seeds,  oxen  and 

1  Huang  Tian  Tung  Tien,  bk.  i,  f .  3. 

2  It  is  interesting  to  compare  this  arrangement  with  the  land  policy 
of  the  United  States  before  the  Civil  War. 


60  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [328 

farming  implements.  Sometimes  even  traveling  expenses 
to  the  new  place  were  allowed.1  This  system  of  giving  aid 
to  the  peasants  in  order  to  enable  them  to  migrate  to  the 
less  populous  parts  of  the  country  and  take  up  lands  existed 
until  as  late  as  the  reign  of  Yung-Chen  (1722-1736),  and 
is  another  important  factor  in  eliminating  the  existence  of 
a  large  class  of  landless  peasants  in  China. 

A  third  policy  adopted  by  the  government  in  extending 
the  area  of  cultivation  and  thus  increasing  the  revenue  of 
the  government  was  to  use  soldiers  to  cultivate  lands.  The 
advantages  of  adopting  this  policy  were  explained  in  the 
memorial  of  Censor  Hsi  Ching  presented  in  the  fifth  year 
of  the  reign  of  Kang-Hsi,  in  which  he  says :  "  The  chief 
cause  of  the  financial  difficulties  of  the  government  lies  in 
the  heavy  military  expenditure.  Eight-tenths  of  our  reve- 
nue to-day  is  spent  in  maintaining  the  soldiers.  On  the 
other  hand,  there  are  large  tracts  of  land  lying  idle  in  many 
of  the  provinces.2  Why  do  we  not  let  the  soldiers  cultivate 
these  lands?  That  will  give  us  the  double  advantage  of 
reducing  the  military  expenditure  and  increasing  the  pro- 
duction of  the  soil."  3  Following  this  recommendation, 
"  the  garrison  commission  in  Honan  was  instructed  to  em- 
ploy the  soldiers  to  develop  the  uncultivated  land  which  was 
not  to  be  taxed  until  the  third  year  of  cultivation,"  and  "  in 
Shensi  the  uncultivated  land  was  gradually  developed  by 
the  infantry  stationed  there."  4  Abandoned  or  uncultivated 
lands  in  Yunnan  and  Szechuan  were  also  given  to  the  sol- 
diers to  cultivate.  When  order  became  well  established 
part  of  the  large  army  that  was  no  longer  needed  was  trans- 

1  Huang  Tiao  Tung  Tien,  bk.  ii,  f.  4. 
'  Ibid.,  bk.  i,  f .  2. 

8  To  Tsing  Wen  Hsien  Tung  Kao,  bk.  x,  f.  I. 

4  Land  Measurement  in  China,  ch.  viii,  in  National  Review,  Nov.  27, 
I9IS,  p.  450. 


-529]  THE  LAND  POLICY  6l 

ported  by  thousands  to  the  frontiers,  nominally  to  serve  as 
a  guard,  but  actually  to  develop  the  country. 

This  practice  of  giving  lands  free  to  the  cultivators  was 
carried  on  vigorously  during  the  early  part  of  the  dynasty, 
and  as  a  result  a  large  amount  of  untilled  or  abandoned 
land  was  put  under  cultivation.  But  with  the  beginning  of 
the  reign  of  Chien-Lung,  toward  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  we  perceive  a  marked  change  in  the  policy.  There 
was  no  longer  any  great  abundance  of  free  land,  so  instead 
of  giving  lands  to  the  cultivators  the  government  now  began 
to  encourage  the  improvement  of  lands  already  under  culti- 
vation. During  this  reign  and  the  following  reigns  laws 
were  passed  permitting  irrigated  lands  in  Honan  and  Hupeh, 
which  had  been  transformed  from  dry  lands,  to  be  taxed  at 
the  same  rate  as  they  had  been  before  the  transformation. 
A  system  of  subsidizing  the  people  to  encourage  them  to 
reclaim  waste  lands  was  also  inaugurated.  For  example, 
"  In  Chekiang  the  people  were  ordered  to  reclaim  all  lands 
that  have  been  rendered  unproductive  by  inundations  or 
whose  irrigated  system  had  been  silted  up;  and  they  were 
accorded  the  same  treatment  as  the  people  of  Kiangsu, 
namely,  that  of  being  granted  a  subsidy  of  T1.2O  per  mow 
for  the  work  and  an  additional  Tl.io  per  mow  for  purchas- 
ing seeds."  1  In  order  to  encourage  the  development  of 
"  odd  pieces  "  of  land  several  laws  were  passed  during  this 
and  the  following  reigns  exempting  from  taxation  small 
plots  of  land,  the  size  varying  from  two  to  ten  mow  accord- 
ing to  the  fertility  of  the  land  and  the  local  conditions.2 

That  this  policy  of  encouraging  the  development  of  all 
arable  lands  was  necessitated  by  the  circumstances  is  evi- 
dent from  two  facts.  In  the  first  place,  in  the  last  year  of 
the  reign  of  Shun-Chin  (1644-1662)  the  amount  of  land 

1  Land  Measurement,  ch.  x,  Nat.  Rev.,  Dec.  18,  1915. 
*  Ta  Tsing  Wen  Hsien  Tung  Kao,  bk.  iv,  f.  20. 


62  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [330 

under  cultivation  was  reported  to  be  5,493,576  ching,  while 
in  the  eleventh  year  of  the  reign  of  Chien-Lung  the  amount 
had  increased  to  7,071,142.  The  actual  increase  in  the  area 
of  cultivation  during  this  period  is  undoubtedly  more  than 
the  amount  reported.  But  the  reported  increase  is  sufficient 
to  show  the  extent  of  the  growth  of  the  area  of  cultivation. 
The  second  fact  is  the  increase  of  population  during  the 
preceding  one  hundred  years.  According  to  the  estimate  of 
Werner,  the  population  at  the  beginning  of  the  Tsing  dy- 
nasty was  probably  no  more  than  50,000,000,  while  by  1742 
it  had  increased  to  over  140,000,000.  The  increase  of  popu- 
lation therefore  necessitated  a  more  intensive  utilization  of 
the  land.1 

Another  characteristic  of  the  Chinese  way  of  encourag- 
ing the  development  of  agriculture  and  extending  the  area 
of  cultivation  was  by  a  system  of  rewarding  officials  with 
marks  of  merit  and  promotion  when  they  succeeded  in 
increasing  the  amount  of  the  cultivated  area  within  their 
respective  jurisdictions.  "  In  the  reign  of  Kang-Hsi  ( 1662- 
1723)  civil  and  military  officials  who  rendered  particularly 
meritorious  service  in  securing  people  to  develop  unculti- 
vated land  were  given  promotion  before  they  had  completed 
the  terms  of  the  office  they  were  holding;  while  subordinate 
officials  and  scholars  who  helped  in  persuading  others  to 
cultivate  their  land  were  awarded  the  rank  of  magistrates 
and  upon  taxes  being  collected  for  the  land  so  cultivated 
were  appointed  to  positions  of  magistracy."  2  On  the  other 
hand,  "  in  any  district  a  magistrate  would  be  subject  to 
heavy  punishment  if  he  allowed  land  to  lie  waste  which  was 
under  cultivation  during  the  tenure  of  the  office  of  his 

1  See  Werner,  Descriptive  Sociology  of  the  Chinese,  p.  50. 
8  Land  Measurement,  ch.  viii. 


33 1  ]  THE  LAND  POLICY  63 

predecessor " ;  *  and  in  the  second  year  of  the  reign  of 
Kang-Hsi  a  decree  was  also  issued  providing  that  "  after 
the  expiration  of  the  fifth  year  of  the  reign  if  it  is  found 
that  there  are  large  tracts  of  land  uncultivated  in  any  dis- 
trict the  magistrate  will  be  dealt  with  by  the  Governor  of 
his  province,  while  the  officials  who  succeeded  in  persuad- 
ing the  people  to  develop  their  land  will  be  rewarded  with 
appointments." 

Decree  after  decree  was  issued,  especially  during  the 
earlier  part  of  the  dynasty,  exalting  agriculture  and  the 
farmers.  In  the  reign  of  Yung-Chen  (1723-1736)  appears 
this  interesting  edict :  "  Among  the  four  people  the  scholars 
are  at  the  head,  and  the  farmers  are  second  only  to  the 
scholars.  The  scholars,  when  they  have  attained  high 
achievement,  are  honored  by  the  Emperor  with  official  rank 
and  given  allowances  from  the  Imperial  Treasury.  But  the 
farmers,  who  labor  all  their  lives  in  order  to  pay  their  taxes, 
support  their  parents  and  raise  their  children,  never  receive 
such  rewards.  Their  self-denying  and  noble  conduct  is 
superior  not  only  to  that  of  the  merchants  and  the  artisans 
but  also  to  that  of  the  unworthy  scholars.  Let  it  therefore 
be  decreed  that  district  magistrates  shall  select  each  year 
from  their  districts  the  most  worthy  farmer  and  recommend 
him  to  us  to  be  decorated  with  the  Eighth  Rank  Honor."  3 
In  the  reign  of  Cheng-Lung  we  also  find  that  "  in  accord- 
ance with  the  practice  followed  in  the  Chow  dynasty  the 
subprefects  and  district  magistrates  were  instructed  to  select 
from  amongst  the  farmers  a  few  elder  men  who  were  ex- 
perienced in  farming,  diligent  in  their  work  and  respected 

1  Land  Measurement,  ch.  viii. 

2  Ta  Tsing  Tung  Tien,  bk.  i,  f .  2 ;  also  Ta  Tsing  Tung  Kao,  bk.  iii, 
f.  ii. 

3  Ta  Tsing  Tung  Kao,  bk.  iv,  p.  18. 


64  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [332 

by  their  fellow- farmers.  They  were  rewarded  according  to 
the  worth  of  the  meritorious  service  they  rendered." 

Other  protection  was  also  given  to  the  farmers.  Early 
in  the  reign  of  Kang-Hsi  a  law  was  promulgated  that  no 
one  except  the  princes  of  the  first  order  (of  which  there 
were  of  course  only  a  few)  would  be  permitted  to  run  over 
the  cultivated  field  of  any  farmer  under  penalty  of  prose- 
cution by  law.1 

From  this  discussion  it  will  be  seen  that  the  land  policy 
of  China  under  the  Tsing  dynasty  was  similar  to  that  of  the 
previous  dynasties.  It  was  based  upon  a  recognition  of  the 
supreme  importance  of  agriculture  as  the  basis  of  national 
economy.  In  order  to  further  the  development  of  agricul- 
ture the  policy  of  the  government  was  to  put  under  cultivation 
as  much  of  the  arable  land  of  the  country  as  possible.  Large 
land  holding  was  always  looked  upon  with  disfavor  by  the 
government.  Landless  peasants  were  aided  in  every  way  to 
acquire  possession  of  the  land.  As  the  result  of  the  persis- 
tent application  of  this  policy  there  is  in  China  a  minute 
division  of  land  holding  such  as  will  perhaps  not  be  found 
anywhere  else  in  the  world.  These  facts  must  be  borne  in 
mind  in  connection  with  the  discussion  of  the  system  of 
taxation  as  it  exists  to-day  and  the  problems  of  its  reform. 

1  Ta  Tsing  Tung  Kao,  op.  cit.,  bk.  n,  f .  8. 


CHAPTER  V 
SYSTEM  OF  LANDHOLDING  UNDER  THE  TSING  DYNASTY 

IN  order  to  understand  the  principles  of  the  system  of 
the  land  tax  as  it  existed  during  the  Tsing  dynasty  and  to 
discuss  some  of  the  present  problems  of  its  reform,  an 
account  of  the  manner  in  which  land  was  distributed  and 
held  in  the  country  is  necessary.  During  the  Tsing  dynasty 
lands  in  China  were  known  by  a  variety  of  names,  some  of 
which  had  historical  and  others  fiscal  significance.  But  in 
spite  of  this  multiplicity  of  names,  lands  in  China  during 
the  Manchu  regime  may  be  divided  into  four  classes  accord- 
ing to  their  form  of  tenure,  namely,  ( i )  lands  under  mili- 
tary tenure;  (2)  lands  under  quasi-military  tenure;  (3) 
lands  under  common  tenure;  and  (4)  public  lands.  Each 
of  these  will  be  discussed  briefly. 

Military  tenure.  When  the  Manchus  established  them- 
selves in  Peking  they  confiscated  the  lands  of  the  imperial 
family,  the  satraps  and  the  high  officials  of  the  dethroned 
dynasty.  These  lands  were  at  first  scattered  all  over  Chihli 
and  the  other  northern  provinces.  Under  the  pretext  of  con- 
solidating them  they  also  appropriated  large  tracts  of  private 
lands  whose  owners  had  either  perished  during  the  war  or 
were  powerless  to  resist.  This  process  of  appropriating 
private  lands  went  on  for  many  years  and  it  was  not  until 
the  tenth  year  of  Shun-Chi  that  an  edict  was  issued  pro- 
hibiting further  "  enclosure,"  as  it  was  called,  of  private 
lands.  But  the  law  was  not  observed  faithfully ;  new  immi- 
grants from  Manchuria  kept  on  coming  in  increasing  num- 
333]  65 


66  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [334 

bers,  and  lands,  often  including  houses,  were  enclosed  by 
them.  Finally  in  the  eighth  year  of  Kang-Hsi  another  law 
was  passed  forbidding  strictly  any  further  appropriation  of 
private  properties.1 

Some  of  the  lands  that  had  thus  fallen  into  their  hands 
were  reserved  for  the  imperial  household,  and  others  were 
given  as  endowments  to  the  several  departments  of  the  gov- 
ernment, whose  functions  were  concerned  with  the  admin- 
istration of  the  affairs  of  the  imperial  clan  and  the  palace. 
But  by  far  the  greater  part  of  these  lands  was  granted  to 
their  kinsmen  and  followers.  In  granting  lands  to  their 
followers  the  policy  of  the  Manchus  was  similar  to  that  of 
the  Normans  when  they  conquered  England  and  took  pos- 
session of  the  Saxon  lands.  Instead  of  granting  large  tracts 
of  land  to  a  few  lords  and  letting  them  subdivide  to  the 
lesser  lords,  as  was  done  in  the  feudal  times  in  Europe  as 
well  as  in  China,  the  land  was  granted  directly,  whether  the 
grantee  was  a  prince  of  the  blood  of  the  first  degree  or  a  com- 
mon Manchu  soldier.  Every  Manchu  who  came  into  the 
new  capital  was  entitled  to  a  tract  of  land,  the  amount  of 
which  varied  from  1,800  mow  in  the  cases  of  the  noble  of 
the  first  degree  to  18  mow  to  the  commoner.  The  purpose 
of  granting  these  lands,  as  stated  in  the  edicts  and  decrees, 
was  twofold.  It  was  not  only  to  strengthen  the  position  of 
the  sovereign  but  also  to  give  some  "  permanent  property  " 
to  each  of  the  Manchus.  No  rent  nor  tax  was  reserved  by 
the  emperor.  The  grantees,  however,  were  bound  to  render 
certain  military  service  to  him.2 

The  land  thus  granted  was  also  inalienable.  But  this  con- 
dition was  not  observed  faithfully,  and  indeed  throughout 
the  reigning  period  of  the  dynasty  attempt  after  attempt 

1  Ta  Tsitig  Tung  Kao,  op.  cit.,  bk.  v,  f .  29. 

'The  amount  of  land  under  this  tenure  was  given  in  the  Hwei  Tien 
as  15,336,600  mow.    See  vol.  x,  ff.  32-33. 


LANDHOLDING  UNDER  THE  TSING  DYNASTY      fy 

was  made  by  the  Peking  government  to  keep  these  lands 
from  falling  back  into  the  hands  of  the  Chinese.  But  in 
spite  of  the  attempts,  a  large  part  of  the  lands  held  under  this 
tenure  gradually  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  Chinese.  In  the 
third  year  of  the  reign  of  Yung-Chen  the  emperor  took 
action  against  all  those  who  had  alienated  their  landed  prop- 
erty in  violation  of  the  law.1  Funds  from  the  treasury  of 
the  Department  of  Revenue  were  appropriated  to  redeem 
all  such  lands,  and  the  original  grantees  were  then  required 
to  redeem  their  lands  from  the  government  at  the  same 
price  at  which  they  were  alienated.  But  it  was  found  that 
in  most  cases  the  grantees  who  had  alienated  their  land 
were  too  poor  to  redeem  them.  Emperor  Yung-Chen 
then  decided  that  these  lands  should  be  held  by  the  Depart- 
ment of  the  Imperial  Clan  ( Tsing  Yin  Fu)  as  trustee  for  the 
Bannermen.  The  lands  were  then  rented  out  to  the  culti- 
vators and  rents  collected  by  certain  Manchu  officials  called 
chuangtao,  each  of  whom  was  responsible  for  one  lot  or  a 
half  lot  of  land,  1,800  mow  being  counted  as  a  lot.  The 
Chinese  chungtao  occupied  a  position  that  may  be  compared 
with  that  of  the  Roman  publicani,  whose  function  it  was  to 
collect  the  revenue  from  lands  that  were  not  appropriated 
by  the  Roman  conqueror  but  let  out  to  the  original  owner 
or  cultivator  on  condition  of  paying  a  rent  or  tribute  to  the 
government.  It  should  also  be  noted  that  it  was  only  in  the 
case  of  the  lands  under  this  tenure  that  the  Chinese  govern- 
ment has  ever  made  any  approach  to  the  practice  of  tax 
farming  or  trusting  the  collection  of  revenues  to  persons 
other  than  the  regular  civil  officers  of  state.  The  rents  thus 
collected  were  distributed  to  the  Banners  in  their  corporate 
capacity  as  "  special  favors  "  from  the  emperor. 

These  lands  were  held  by  the  government  for  the  benefit 
of  the  Banners  for  more  than  half  a  century.     But  in  the 

1  Ta  Tsing  Tung  Kao,  bk.  v,  f.  31. 


68  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [336 

twenty -eighth  year  of  his  reign  Emperor  Chien-Lung  (1746- 
1796)  decided  to  redistribute  them  to  the  Bannermen  for 
cultivation  under  practically  the  same  terms  as  those  in 
which  they  were  originally  granted,1  namely,  exemption 
from  taxation  and  inalienability.  But  the  rule  of  inalien- 
ability was  neither  observed  faithfully  by  the  grantees  nor 
enforced  strictly  by  the  grantor.  Under  pressure  of  the 
circumstances  the  Manchus  continued  to  transfer  their  lands, 
mostly  in  the  form  of  pledging,2  to  the  Chinese,  so  much  so 
that  Emperor  Hsien-Feng  (18501861)  was  finally  obliged 
to  take  the  drastic  measure  of  abolishing  this  law  of  in- 
alienability which  had  existed  for  more  than  two  hundred 
years.  "  In  the  past  the  Manchus  and  the  Chinese,"  says 
the  Emperor  in  a  decree  which  was  issued  in  the  second 
year  of  his  reign,  "  have  been  strictly  prohibited  from  ex- 
changing their  properties.  But  circumstances  have  made 
strict  observance  of  this  law  impossible.  Under  various 
disguises,  such  as  security  for  loans  or  advance  payments 
of  rent  for  a  long  period,  much  of  the  land  held  by  the 
Manchus  has  been  transferred  to  the  hands  of  the  Chinese. 
It  would  be  futile  to  continue  to  enforce  this  law.  In  ac- 
cordance with  the  request  of  the  Board  of  Revenue  let  it 
therefore  be  decreed  that  Manchus  and  Chinese,  except  in 
regard  to  their  lands  in  Fengtien,  are  hereby  permitted  to 
exchange  their  property  without  restriction."  3  Transfers 
of  lands  made  before  the  issuance  of  the  decree  were  re- 
quired to  be  registered,  as  in  the  case  of  lands  under  com- 
mon tenure,  and  the  lands  were  subject  to  the  same  rate  of 
taxation  as  lands  under  common  tenure.4  At  first  the  taxes 
collected  from  these  lands  formed  a  separate  item  and  were 

1  Ta  Tsing  Hwei  Tien  Shih  Li,  bk.  clx,  f.  I. 

2  See  infra,  pp.  76-77. 

»  Ta  Tsing  Hwei  Tien  Shih  Li,  bk.  clx,  f .  8. 
4  Ibid. 


237]       LANDHOLDING  UNDER  THE  TSING  DYNASTY      69 

remitted  to  Peking  in  a  lump  sum  and  it  was  not  until  the 
thirteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  Kwang-Hsu  (1876-1908) 
that  the  receipts  of  the  taxes  from  these  lands  was  amal- 
gamated with  the  receipts  of  the  other  land  taxes.1  Al- 
though another  law  was  passed  in  the  fifteenth  year  of 
Kwang-Hsu  prohibiting  any  further  alienation  of  the  Ban- 
ner lands,2  the  greater  part  of  the  lands  that  were  originally 
held  under  military  tenure  had  been  transformed  by  the  end 
of  the  Tsing  dynasty  into  the  common  tenure,  of  which 
more  will  be  said  presently. 

Semi-military  tenure.  In  many  parts  of  China  to-day 
there  are  large  tracts  of  land  known  as  tun-tien,  or  lands 
under  semi-military  tenure.  The  tun-tien  has  a  much  longer 
and  more  interesting  history  than  kwan-chuang  or  lands 
under  military  tenure.  The  origin  of  tun-tien  is  to  be  found 
in  the  Tang  dynasty  (618-906  A.  D.)  during  which  a  large 
amount  of  land  was  appropriated  by  the  government  in  the 
various  military  stations  to  the  soldiers,  who  cultivated 
them  under  what  we  may  term  military  tenure.  But  toward 
the  end  of  the  dynasty  when  the  country  was  ravaged  by 
war  these  soldiers  were  recalled  from  their  farms  and  sent 
to  the  places  where  their  service  was  required.  The  lands 
were  let  out  to  the  people  for  cultivation,  the  system  falling 
into  decay.  It  was  not  until  the  beginning  of  the  Ming 
dynasty  that  the  system  was  revived.  Military  stations  were 
re-established  throughout  the  country  and  to  the  soldiers  in 
the  stations  lands  were  given  to  cultivate  when  they  were 
not  required  to  be  in  active  service.  These  military  stations 
were  placed  under  the  control  of  special  officers  called 
Tu-Shih. 

When  the  Manchus  came  to  China  this  system  of  main- 
taining military  stations  under  the  control  of  special  officers, 

1  Ta  Tsing  Hwei  Tien  Shih  Li,  bk.  clx,  f .  9. 
s  Ibid. 


70  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [338 

usually  one  Tu-Shih  and  a  number  of  subordinates  for  each 
province,  who  were  independent  of  both  the  military  and 
the  civil  officials  of  the  province,  was  still  in  existence.  But 
as  the  Manchu  government  maintained  a  regular  army 
which  was  distributed  in  the  provinces,  besides  special  gar- 
risons consisting  of  their  own  kinsmen,  these  stations  grad- 
ually lost  their  military  character  and  one  after  another, 
except  in  the  provinces  which  paid  the  grain  tributes,  were 
abolished.  In  the  provinces  where  the  stations  were  abol- 
ished the  lands  were  retained  by  the  occupants  and  subject 
to  rates  of  taxation  heavier  than  the  ordinary  rates,  part  of 
which  was  considered  as  rent  on  the  land.  But  in  the  course 
of  time  the  occupiers  through  long  possession  practically  be- 
came owners  except  that  the  title  still  remained  in  the  state. 

In  the  provinces  which  had  to  send  grain  tributes  to 
Peking  the  holders  of  the  lands  were  required  to  render  cer- 
tain services  in  connection  with  the  transportation  of  the 
grain  from  the  various  districts  to  the  centers  of  transpor- 
tation, where  they  were  put  aboard  junks  to  be  transported 
to  the  capital.  In  such  provinces  the  tun-tien  were  subject 
to  lighter  rates  of  taxation  than  the  ordinary  land.1  But 
after  the  commutation  of  the  grain  tributes  into  money 
payment  the  services  which  were  formerly  required  of  the 
holders  of  this  class  of  land  were  also  commuted  mto 
money. 

The  taxes  including  the  rents  on  tun-tien  were  originally 
collected  by  special  officials  known  as  tun-tien  commission- 
ers (tun-tien  yu-shih)  and  tun-tien  intendants  (tun-tien 
too).  These  offices  were  abolished  at  the  beginning  of  the 
eighteenth  century  and  the  taxes  Oh  Jun-tien  were  made  col- 
lectible by  the  district  magistrates.2 

1  Ta  Tsing  Hwei  Tien,  bk.  x,  ff.  33-34- 

2  In  the  first  year  of  Chien-Lung  (1767)  the  amount  of  land  under 


339]       LANDHOLDING  UNDER  THE  TSING  DYNASTY      yi 

Tun-tien  were  originally  inalienable.  But  with  the  com- 
mutation of  the  services  into  money  payments  the  rule  of 
inalienability  was  also  relaxed  and  gradually  abolished; 
and  although  a  large  part  of  the  lands  in  the  various  prov- 
inces are  to-day  still  called  tun-tien  they  have  for  all  pur- 
poses of  taxation  the  same  character  as  the  ordinary  kind 
of  land. 

Common  tenure.  The  great  bulk  of  the  lands  in  China 
to-day  as  well  as  during  the  Tsing  dynasty  are  held  under 
what  is  called  common  tenure.  From  the  discussion  of  the 
development  of  the  tax  it  is  apparent  that  from  the  earliest 
times  the  general  policy  of  the  government  toward  land  has 
been  to  distribute  it  as  widely  as  possible.  In  parceling  out 
the  soil,  the  question  whether  the  emperor  reserved  for  him- 
self the  title  of  ultimate  ownership  is  of  academic  rather  than 
of  practical  importance.  The  answer  depends  first  upon  the 
degree  of  interference  which  the  emperor  reserved  to  him- 
self in  dealing  with  the  land;  second,  upon  the  degree  of 
freedom  which  the  holder  had  in  the  disposition  of  his  hold- 
ings ;  and  third,  upon  the  proportion  of  tax  imposed  on  the 
produce  of  the  land.  Theoretically,  the  lands  in  China 
before  the  Republic  were  considered  as  belonging  to  the 
emperor.  The  theory  is  probably  best  expressed  in  that 
classic  saying :  "  All  the  land  under  heaven  is  the  property 
of  the  sovereign;  all  the  dwellers  on  the  land  are  the  sub- 
jects of  the  king."  Throughout  the  various  dynasties,  at 
least  from  Ch'in  on,  this  theory  of  absolute  ownership  of 
land  by  the  sovereign  has  found  expression  in  the  decrees, 
edicts,  memorials  and  other  state  papers. 

But  in  practice  the  right  of  ownership  of  the  emperor  to 
land  was  more  nominal  than  real.  Lands  once  held  by  pri- 
vate individuals  can  be  dealt  in  freely.  They  can  be  sold, 

this  tenure  was,  according  to  the  official  returns,  39,452,799  mow  and 
the  revenue  collected  in  that  year  was  Tls.  784,902,  1,097,064  shin  of 
grain  and  5,056,620  bundles  of  straw.  See  Tung  Kao,  bk.  x,  f.  2-3. 


72  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [340 

mortgaged  or  leased  without  interference  on  the  part  of  the 
government;  and  the  terms  employed  in  the  transfer  of 
lands  are  similar  to  those  used  in  the  transfer  of  ordinary 
personal  property.  The  only  condition  of  landholding  in 
China  is  the  payment  of  an  annual  tax  and  a  registration 
fee  in  case  of  transfer.  The  right  of  taxation  is  based  on 
the  theory  of  government  rather  than  on  a  partial  owner- 
ship of  land.  We  may  say,  therefore,  that  private  owner- 
ship of  land  under  this  tenure  is  as  nearly  absolute  as  it  can 
be  under  any  government  in  the  civilized  world. 

It  is  true  that  the  emperor  was  the  owner  of  waste 
lands  in  the  country  and  the  final  reversioner  of  all  arable 
lands  which  had  been  abandoned  by  the  original  owner  or 
which  for  any  reason  became  ownerless.  But  lands  were 
held  by  the  government  rather  as  a  trustee  for  the  general 
public  than  as  absolute  owner;  for  the  policy  of  the 
Chinese  government  toward  land,  as  we  have  seen,  has 
always  been  to  distribute  it  as  widely  as  possible  among  the 
great  mass  of  people. 

Under  this  tenure  lands  are  known  by  different  names, 
some  of  which  have  fiscal  and  others  historical  significance. 
There  are,  for  example,  in  many  provinces  large  tracts  of 
land  known  as  ken-min-tien  (changed-name  lands)  which 
were  originally  lands  held  by  the  satraps  of  the  Ming  dy- 
nasty who  collected  the  rents,  including  taxes,  from  the  cul- 
tivators. In  the  beginning  of  the  Tsing  dynasty  these 
lands,  as  those  in  Chihli  and  Shantung,  were  confiscated  by 
the  government  and  the  old  rate  of  rents  continued  to  be 
collected.  But  large  parts  of  these  lands  were  soon  either 
sold  or  given  to  the  original  cultivators,  as  those  in  Yunnan.1 
In  the  eighth  year  of  Kang-Hsi  an  edict,  however,  was 
issued  reducing  the  rents  on  these  lands  to  what  was  then 
equivalent  to  the  ordinary  rates  of  land  tax.  The  tenants 

1  Ta  Tsing  Tung  Tien,  bk.  iii,  ff.  1-2. 


341  ]       LANDHOLDING  UNDER  THE  TSING  DYNASTY      73 

thus  became  virtually  owners  of  the  land.  There  is  another 
class  of  land  known  as  lu-tien  or  reed-land,  found  in  the 
maritime  provinces  and  along  the  rivers.  On  these  lands 
reeds  were  raised,  the  cultivators  being  charged  a  sort  of 
quasi-rent.  A  fuller  discussion  of  the  various  classes  of 
lands  under  this  tenure  will  be  given  when  we  come  to  the 
discussion  of  the  land  tax.1 

Public  lands.  It  has  already  been  pointed  out  more  than 
once  that  the  policy  of  the  Chinese  government  almost  from 
time  immemorial  has  been  to  parcel  out  the  arable  area  of 
the  country  among  the  cultivators  as  far  as  possible.  The 
government  has  never  held  any  extensive  public  domain. 
There  was,  however,  in  the  Tsing  dynasty  one  class  of 
lands  which  may  properly  be  called  public  lands.  This  con- 
sisted of  the  hioh-tien  2  or  educational  land  and  lands  that 
were  given  to  the  various  public  institutions  without  power 
of  alienation.  The  educational  lands  were  appropriated  at 
the  beginning  of  the  dynasty  for  the  purpose  of  maintaining 
the  educational  institutions,  as  was  done  in  many  of  the 
American  states  in  the  nineteenth  century.  The  rents,  in- 
cluding the  taxes  on  these  lands,  were  collected  as  the  other 
kinds  of  lands  by  the  district  magistrates  and  then  turned 
over  to  the  provincial  literary  chancellor  for  the  above- 
mentioned  purposes.  The  other  portion  of  lands  in,  this  class 
was  made  up  of  grants  to  the  temples  and  tombs  of  the 
sages  of  the  country  for  their  maintenance,  and  to  the  vari- 
ous public  institutions  of  the  provinces.  These  lands  consti- 
tute, however,  a  small  portion  of  the  total  cultivated  land 
of  the  country.3 

1  Cf.  infra,  pp.  90-91. 

2  The  amount  of  educational  land  was  given  at  1,158,600  mow  dis- 
tributed in  the  various  provinces.     Tung  Kao,  bk.  xii,  f.  16. 

9  For  a  fuller  description  of  this  class  of  land  cj.  Ta  Tsing  Tung  Kao, 
bk.  xii,  passim.  The  amount  of  land  under  this  class  was  given  at 
362,000  mow  in  Hwei  Tien,  bk.  x,  f.  33. 


CHAPTER  VI 
MODES  OF  ACQUIRING  AND  TRANSFERRING  LANDS 

HAVING  discussed  the  various  systems  of  land  tenure  in 
China,  let  us  now  turn  our  attention  to  a  study  of  the  modes 
by  which  lands  are  acquired  and  transferred.  Upon  analy- 
sis we  find  that  there  are  four  general  methods,  each  of 
which  has  several  variations,  viz.:  (a)  transfer  of  land  by 
sale;  (b)  transfer  of  land  by  mortgage;  (c)  succession 
and  inheritance;  and  (d)  acquisition  of  abandoned  or  new 
land. 

Transfer  of  Land  by  Sale.  Transfer  of  lands  by  sale  is 
effected  by  means  of  a  deed  subscribed  to  by  the  seller  and 
one  or  more  middlemen.  The  form,  of  the  deed  is  made  uni- 
form throughout  the  country.  It  usually  states  that  the 
seller  being  in  want  of  money  or  desirous  of  investment 
elsewhere  and  having  first  offered  the  land  to  his  kinsmen, 
who  declined  to  buy,  has  agreed  through  the  middlemen  to 
sell  it  to  so-and-so  for  such-and-such  a  price.  This  citation 
that  the  kinsmen  have  been  first  consulted  is  derived  from 
the  ancient  custom  that  land  should  not  be  transferred  to 
persons  outside  of  the  family  or  clan  in  whom,  in  distinc- 
tion from  individuals,  was  vested  the  right  of  land  owner- 
ship. The  middleman  is  usually  a  neighbor  or  friend  of  the 
parties.  Although  he  does  not  guarantee  the  validity  of  the 
title,  he  is  supposed  to  vouch  for  the  seller's  being  what  he 
represents  himself  to  be,  and  that  the  transaction  is  carried 
out  in  good  faith.  The  number  of  middlemen  in  some  cases 
is  as  great  as  eight  or  ten. 

74  [342 


343]  MODES  OF  ACQUIRING  LANDS  75 

Another  indispensable  party  to  the  transfer  is  the  tipao 
or  the  village  headman,  who,  as  we  have  seen,  performs 
certain  important  functions  in  connection  with  the  collection 
of  the  land  tax,  the  survey  of  the  lands  and  the  settlement 
of  land  disputes.  The  tipao3 s  seal  must  be  affixed  to  the 
deed  before  it  can  be  registered  in  the  office  of  the  dis- 
trict magistrate,  a  formality  which  is  required  of  every 
transfer  of  land  by  sale.  The  legal  fee  for  registration  is 
three  per  cent  of  the  price  stated  in  the  deed  of  sale.  In 
practice  it  usually  amounts  to  nine  or  ten  per  cent,  as  there 
are  several  extra  charges,  such  as  yameris  fee,  meltage  fee, 
etc.  On  account  of  this  heavy  rate  this  tax  is  often  evaded 
in  whole  or  in  part.  Evasion  in  part  can  be  easily  effected 
by.  executing  two  deeds,  the  price  in  the  deed  going  to  the 
district  magistrate  for  registration  being  greatly  under- 
stated while  the  true  consideration  is  stated  in  the  one  re- 
tained by  the  vendee. 

A  sale  of  land  may  either  be  irrevocable  or  revocable. 
In  the  latter  case  it  is  expressly  stated  in  the  contract  that 
the  vendor  reserves  the  right  of  redemption  within  a 
given  period.  If  he  does  not  exercise  his  right  of  re- 
demption on  the  expiration  of  the  stated  period  the  vendee 
retains  possession  of  the  land.  The  vendor  in  case  of  re- 
vocable sale  is  said  to  retain  the  tien-chun  or  root  of  the  soil 
and  the  vendee  is  said  to  possess  only  the  tien-mian  or  the 
face  of  the  soil.  If  the  deed  is  not  clear  as  to  whether  the 
sale  is  revocable  or  irrevocable  the  law  solves  the  question 
by  prescribing  that  if  thirty  years  have  elapsed  the  sale  is  to 
be  considered  as  an  irrevocable  sale  and  the  seller  cannot 
demand  either  redemption  or  the  balance  of  the  value  of  the 
property,  while  if  the  sale  is  of  less  than  thirty  years'  stand- 
ing it  is  to  be  considered  revocable. 

Transfer  of  Land  by  Mortgage.  The  second  method  of 
transferring  land  in  China,  which  is  probably  older  than 


76  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [344 

that  of  sale,  is  the  mortgage.  There  are  two  kinds  of  mort- 
gages— the  mortgage  proper  and  the  pledge.  Similar  to  the 
practice  of  the  English-speaking  world  the  Chinese  mort- 
gage proper  is  a  contract  by  which  money  is  borrowed  on 
the  security  of  the  land,  the  mortgagor  retaining  possession, 
although  he  surrenders  the  title-deed  of  the  property  to  the 
mortgagee  with  a  memorandum  setting  forth  the  terms  of 
the  transaction.  The  mortgagee  has  no  claim  on  the  prop- 
erty unless  the  mortgagor  fails  to  pay  either  the  interest  or 
the  principal  at  the  expiration  of  the  term  agreed  upon  and 
in  that  event  he  may  secure  from  the  local  magistrate  a 
decree  to  sell  or  foreclose  the  property. 

The  Chinese  tien-tan  or  pledge  differs  from  the  mortgage 
proper  in  several  essentials.  In  the  pledge,  the  debtor  de- 
livers the  property  to  the  creditor  in  consideration  of  a  sum 
of  money,  the  use  and  income  of  the  property  being  surren- 
dered in  lieu  of  interest  during  the  period  of  the  contract. 
The  original  owner  of  the  land,  however,  can  get  it  back  on 
repayment  of  the  money.  The  theory  here  is  that  the  land 
and  not  the  money  is  lent.  The  owner  merely  "  lends  "  the 
land  to  the  creditor  for  the  use  of  the  money.  He  retains 
the  title  of  the  land  and  pays  the  taxes  on  it.  "  The  pledge 
differs  from  the  mortgage,"  as  has  been  pointed  out  by  an 
eminent  authority  on  Chinese  jurisprudence,  "  in  that  in 
pledging,  the  debtor  delivers  the  property  and  pays  no  in- 
terest on  the  money  due,  and  the  creditor  enjoys  the  prop- 
erty and  its  income  in  lieu  of  interest ;  in  a  mortgage,  how- 
ever, the  debtor  only  secures  the  debt  on  the  property,  does 
not  deliver  possession  of  it  and  pays  interest,  while  the  cred- 
itor does  not  enjoy  the  property  and  its  income,  but  only 
has  an  action  against  it  if  the  debt  is  not  repaid  by  the 
debtor."  Pledging  may  also  be  distinguished  from  revoc- 

1  Peter  Hoang,  A  Practical  Treatise  on  Legal  Ownership,  ch.   iii, 
sec.  xxiii. 


345]  MODES  OF  ACQUIRING  LANDS  77 

able  sale  in  the  fact  that  in  pledging  the  time  of  redemption 
is  usually  indefinite  and  seldom  extends  beyond  ten  years, 
at  the  expiration  of  which  the  pledging  must  be  converted 
into  a  sale  by  a  new  contract,  and  further,  in  the  fact  that 
in  pledging  the  parties  exchange  deeds,  one  executed  by  the 
party  delivering  the  property  and  the  other  by  the  party  re- 
ceiving the  property. 

Under  the  Chinese  law  mortgages,  including  pledging 
and  revocable  sale  which  for  purposes  of  taxation  may  be 
considered  as  mortgages,  are  exempted  from  taxes  except 
a  registration  fee  of  one  and  one-half  per  cent  of  the  mort- 
gage value.  Such  registration,  however,  is  required  only 
of  mortgages  of  more  than  ten  years  duration.  The  result 
is  that  the  payment  of  this  fee  is  evaded  almost  invariably 
by  limiting  the  duration  of  the  mortgage  to  ten  years  and 
renewing  it,  if  necessary,  at  the  expiration  of  the  period. 

Historically  these  three  forms  of  transferring  lands, 
pledging,  revocable  and  irrevocable  sale,  appear  to  possess 
a  sequence  of  development.  Pledging  is  perhaps  the  oldest 
of  the  three;  revocable  sale,  the  intermediate,  and  irrevoc- 
able, the  latest.  In  early  times  lands  were  owned,  not  by  the 
individuals  but  by  the  family  or  the  clan  as  its  common 
property,  and  sale  was  prohibited.  As  the  right  of  indi- 
vidual ownership  developed  the  prohibition  against  aliena- 
tion was  relaxed.  Although  the  family  as  a  whole  possessed 
a  more  or  less  qualified  interest  in  the  land,  the  individual 
was  permitted  to  deal  in  it  provided  he  paid  due  regard  to 
the  family  rights  by  reserving  the  right  of  redemption  or 
by  giving  the  other  members  of  the  family  the  first  option 
of  purchase.  Instead  of  selling  the  land  outright  he  reserved 
the  right  of  redemption.  As  time  went  on  the  right  of  in- 
dividual ownership  was  further  developed  and  the  revocable 
sale,  which  was  a  step  further  toward  the  direction  of  final 
alienation,  was  adopted.  It  was  not  until  individual  owner- 


78  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [346 

ship  in  distinction  from  family  ownership  was  fully  recog- 
nized that  the  irrevocable  sale  was  finally  established.1 

It  may  be  interesting  to  observe  that  the  Chinese  pledg- 
ing bears  a  close  resemblance  to  the  Roman  pignus.  Similar 
to  the  Chinese  pledging,  the  Roman  pignut  involved  a  trans- 
fer of  the  land  to  the  creditor  as  a  security  for  the  money, 
the  creditor  enjoying  the  use  or  the  income  of  the  land 
during  the  period  of  contract  in  lieu  of  interest.  "  There  is, 
however,  this  important  difference,  namely,  that  in  case 
where  the  debt  was  not  paid  at  the  stipulated  time,  the 
creditor,  not  the  debtor,  was  clothed  with  authority  to  sell 
the  pledge  and  reimburse  himself  from  the  proceeds."  2 

At  the  expiration  of  the  time  of  pledging,  and  for  that 
matter,  of  revocable  sale  as  well,  the  property  may  be  re- 
deemed or  a  subsequent  receipt  of  the  balance  of  the  value 
may  take  place.  On  redemption  the  property  should  be  re- 
turned in  the  same  state  as  it  was  received.  If  improve- 
ments on  the  land  have  been  removed  or  damaged,  deduc- 
tion for  compensation  is  made  from  the  price  of  redemp- 
tion. On  the  other  hand,  if  improvements  have  been 
made  by  the  occupant  they  may  be  taken  away  or  sold 
to  the  redeemer.  If  the  property  is  not  redeemed  the 
original  owner  may  claim  what  is  called  in  Chinese  chia- 
chiao,  or  payment  of  the  balance  of  the  value.  The  claim 
for  such  payment  does  not  always  involve  the  selling  of  the 
property  by  irrevocable  sale.  The  deed  may  or  may  not  be 
converted  into  an  irrevocable  sale.  In  the  latter  case  the 
balance  is  paid  and  the  time  of  redemption  extended,  at  the 
expiration  of  which  the  owner  may  claim  redemption  but 

1  >See  George  Jamieson,  "  Land  Tenure  in  China."  //.  Asiatic  Assn., 
vol.  xxiii,  pp.  71-72. 

2T.  T.  Meadows,  "On  the  Tenure  and  Transfer  of  Real  Property  in 
China  and  the  Mode  of  Succession  of  Land."  //.  Asiatic  Assn.,  vol. 
xxiii,  p.  160. 


MODES  OF  ACQUIRING  LANDS  79 

not  any  further  payment.  If  he  does  not  redeem  the  land 
he  must  execute  a  deed  of  irrevocable  sale  to  the  buyer  or 
the  pledgee  as  the  case  may  be. 

It  may  be  observed  here  that  in  some  parts  of  the  country 
a  further  claim  may  be  made  on  the  buyer  of  an  irrevocable 
sale  on  the  basis  of  alms.  Such  consideration  is  based  on 
what  the  Chinese  call  "  sympathetic, consideration"  and  is 
not  upheld  by  the  law.  To  avoid  such  claim  a  written 
statement  was  sometimes  required  by  the  buyer  of  an  irre- 
vocable ,  sale.  It  should  also  be  noted  that  in  some  parts  of 
the  country  an  irrevocable  sale  is  executed  in  one  deed 
while  in  other  parts  four  deeds  are  required,  namely,  a  deed 
of  revocable  sale,  a  receipt  of  the  balance  of  value,  a  deed 
of  subsequent  irrevocable  sale  and  a  statement  of  the  receipt 
of  the  alms.  These  are  executed  simultaneously.1 

In  transferring  lands  in  China  a  distinction  between  the 
soil  and  the  surface  is  sometimes  made.  Where  such  dis- 
tinction is  made  the  soil  is  usually  worth  from  three  to  eight 
times  the  amount  of  the  surface.2  The  possessor  of  the 
soil  is  called  tributary  (he  pays  the  tribute)  and  is  liable  for 
the  tax  on  the  land  while  the  possessor  of  the  surface  who 
is  usually  also  the  cultivator  has  the  preferential  right  to 
lease  the  land  for  cultivation.  The  owner  of  the  soil  cannot 
make  any  improvement  on  the  land  without  his  consent. 
Nor  can  he  be  dislodged  from  the  land  unless  he  fails  to 
pay  his  rent  to  the  amount  of  the  value  of  the  surface.  In 
other  words,  the  possessor  of  the  surface  has  the  exclusive 
right  of  leasing  the  land  while  the  possessor  of  the  soil  has 
only  a  limited  right  over  the  land. 

1  Peter  Hoang,  op.  cit.,  ch.  iii,  sees,  xxviii-xxx. 

*In  some  parts  of  the  country  however  the  reverse  is  true.  The 
surface  is  worth  more  than  the  soil  and  its  possessor  may  make  any 
improvements  on  the  land  without  the  interference  of  the  possessor 
of  the  soil. 


go  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [348 

Either  one  of  the  two  rights  may  be  transferred  separ- 
ately. In  case  the  tributary  transfers  his  right  to  some 
other  person,  the  tenant  must  be  notified  and  required  to 
sign  a  new  lease.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the  tenant  transfers 
his  right  he  must  satisfy  the  tributary,  the  possessor  of  the 
soil,  that  the  new  tenant  will  pay  his  rent  faithfully.  In- 
stead of  selling  his  right,  the  tenant  may  merely  lease  his 
right  of  cultivation  to  a  third  party,  and  in  that  case  the 
lessee  pays  rent  to  both  the  possessor  of  the  soil  and  the 
owner  of  the  surface.  This  distinction  between  the  soil 
and  the  surface  is  peculiarly  Chinese,  and  although  it  is 
not  very  common  to-day  it  was  the  prevailing  practice  in 
earlier  times. 

Transfer  of  Land  by  Inheritance.  The  third  method  of 
acquiring  the  right  of  land  is  by  inheritance  or  succession. 
The  general  rule  of  succession  in  China  is  that  upon  the 
death  of  a  man  his  property,  both  personal  and  real,  is 
divided  equally  among  his  male  issue.  Under  no  circum- 
stance would  the  law  permit  a  man  to  deprive  his  children 
of  the  right  of  succession  to  his  property.  It  is  true  that 
during  his  life  one  may  give  part  of  his  property  to  benev- 
olent institutions  but  he  cannot  bequeath  his  property  by 
will  for  such  purposes.  If  he  has  no  male  children  he  may 
adopt  a  son  from  his  consanguineous  agnatic  relatives.  It 
is  only  in  default  of  male  heirs,  born  or  adopted,  that  the 
female  children  inherit  his  property.  The  preference  for  an 
adopted  male  over  the  female  is  to  be  explained  by  the  ex- 
istence of  ancestor  worship,  which  can  be  carried  on  by  the 
male  children  only.  In  case  there  is  no  heir,  the  land  re- 
verts to  the  government.  The  law  requires  the  village 
headman  to  report  such  cases  to  the  local  authority. 

It  should  be  observed  that  the  rule  of  equal  division 
among  the  male  issue  applies  only  to  the  lands  of  the  people. 
In  the  case  of  lands  granted  by  the  emperor  or  in  the  succes- 


349]  MODES  OF  ACQUIRING  LANDS  8l 

sion  of  the  rank  of  nobility  the  doctrine  of  primogeniture 
is  followed  in  China  as  elsewhere.  The  actual  division  of  the 
property,  however,  does  not  always  take  place  immediately 
after  the  death  of  the  father.  The  heirs  may  continue  to  live 
together,  especially  when  there  is  a  mother  or  unmarried 
sisters  to  be  provided  for,  or  the  property  is  too  small  to 
be  divided  advantageously.  But  division  usually  takes  place 
in  the  next  generation  if  not  in  the  present  one.  On  divi- 
sion the  oldest  son  is  usually  entitled  to  an  extra  share  in 
order  to  defray  the  cost  of  carrying  on  the  family  ancestor 
worship.  This  system  of  division  is  certainly  one  of  the 
important  factors  in  accounting  for  the  small  land  holdings 
in  China.  By  this  process  of  division  the  holdings  tend  to 
become  smaller  and  smaller. 

Acquisition  of  Abandoned  or  New  Land.  The  fourth 
and  last  method  of  acquiring  land  is  by  taking  possession  or 
purchasing  from  the  government  lands  that  have  not  been 
cultivated,  lands  which  have  reverted  to  the  government 
through  abandonment,  or  lands  newly  formed  by  alluvial 
or  other  natural  process  and  unclaimed.  We  have  already 
seen  that  the  government  is  in  theory  the  final  reversioner 
of  all  lands,  either  unclaimed  or  reclaimed.1  Such  lands 
may  be  acquired  either  by  taking  possession  or  by  purchase 
from  the  government.  Formerly,  in  cases  where  land  was 
abundant,  it  could  be  acquired  merely  by  bringing  it  under 
cultivation,  and  after  a  period  of  from  three  to  ten  years 
according  to  the  local  conditions,  when  the  cultivator  began 
to  pay  his  tax  on  the  land,  he  acquired  his  permanent  title.2 
In  cases  where  the  land  was  less  abundant,  a  price  accord- 
ing to  the  kind  of  land  and  the  local  conditions  was  usually 
charged  by  the  government,  and  in  such  cases  the  purchaser 
acquired  title  to  the  land  immediately  after  the  payment  of 

1  Cf.  supra,  p.  72. 

2  Cf.  supra,  p.  59. 


g2  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [350 

the  price. l  In  either  case  the  owner  had  to  bring  the  land 
that  he  acquired  under  cultivation.  He  could  not  acquire 
such  lands  in  any  amount  larger  than  that  which  he  could 
put  under  cultivation.  Speculation  was  thus  made  very 
difficult.  The  Chinese  theory  of  land  holding  is  that  land 
is  held  for  the  benefit  of  the  community  and  that  no  one 
should  hold  more  of  it  than  he  can  turn  to  some  account. 
This  theory  was  carried  out  in  the  early  part  of  the  Tsing 
dynasty,  even  so  far  as  to  require  by  law  the  large  land- 
holders to  lease  out  holdings  to  cultivators  under  penalty  of 
confiscation.  *  It  had  a  tremendous  influence  upon  the  system 
of  land  holding  and  the  economic  development  of  the  coun- 
try. Coupled  with  the  principle  of  equal  division  that  we  have 
just  discussed,  it  accounts  to  a  large  extent  for  the  small 
size  of  land  holdings  and  the  extent  of  the  area  of  cultiva- 
tion. The  small  holdings,  and  the  intensive  cultivation  are 
responsible  for  many  of  the  characteristic  economic  develop- 
ments of  the  country,  such  as  the  size  of  the  population, 
the  absence  of  slavery  and  serfdom,  the  absence  of  a  landed 
aristocracy  and  the  democratic  character  of  the  people. 
Would  space  permit,  it  would  be  most  interesting  and  im- 
portant to  carry  this  study  further.  That,  however,  is  not 
our  immediate  concern  in  this  monograph. 

As  to  lands  formed  by  alluvial  deposits,  the  Chinese  law 
distinguished  two  kinds,  namely,  "  old  lands  now  re- 
formed "  and  "  lands  formed  independently  in  the  middle 
of  the  stream."  "  Reformed  lands  "  were  lands  which  had 
been  washed  away  but  which  reappeared,  either  in  the  same 
locality  or  on  the  other  bank  of  the  stream  or  in  its  neigh- 
borhood. Such  lands  belonged  to  the  owner  whose  lands 
had  disappeared.  Claims  were  made  to  a  local  magistrate 

1  Cf.  supra,  pp.  58-59- 

2  Ta  Tsing  Tung  Kao,  bk.  x,  f.  10. 


35I]  MODES  OF  ACQUIRING  LANDS  83 

who,  after  satisfying  himself  of  the  validity  of  the  claim, 
would  issue  a  new  certificate  to  the  claimant  and  enter  the 
same  on  the  public  record.  In  case  of  lands  newly  formed 
which  had  not  been  claimed,  or  claimed  without  sufficient 
proof,  the  lands  reverted  to  the  government,  which  could  then 
either  sell  them  or  allot  them  to  the  cultivators  as  the  case 
might  be.  Such  lands  were,  however,  often  exempted  from 
the  land  tax  for  a  period  of  from  three  to  ten  years,  accord- 
ing to  local  conditions. 

Besides  these  two  kinds  of  lands  there  is  a  third  that 
should  be  noted.  This  is  what  the  Chinese  call  "  waste 
lands,"  that  is,  lands  which  either  have  not  been  cleared 
or  are  not  suitable  for  cultivation.  On  such  lands,  especially 
those  which  are  adjacent  to  the  villages,  the  villagers  have 
common  rights  to  pasture  or  to  cut  wood  for  fuel.  In 
certain  southern  parts  of  China,  where  coal  is  very  little 
used  for  fuel  purposes,  cutting  wood  was  an  occupation 
followed  by  many  people.  There  was  no  provision  of  law 
against  it;  anyone  had  a  right  to  chop  down  trees  and 
shrubs  from  the  waste  lands.  This  situation  undoubtedly 
accounts  to  a  large  extent  for  the  deplorable  condition  of 
the  forests  in  China. 

Having  discussed  the  modes  in  which  lands  may  be 
acquired  or  transferred  in  China,  let  us  now  turn  our  atten- 
tion to  the  ways  in  which  lands  are  leased.  As  has  been 
pointed  out,  the  land  holdings  in  China  are,  as  a  rule,  very 
small.  There  is  no  landed  aristocracy  in  China.  It  is  true 
that  at  the  beginning  of  the  Tsing  dynasty  a  considerable 
amount  of  land  was  granted  to  the  Manchu  princes  and 
nobles.  But  such  grants  were,  as  a  rule,  very  small  in 
comparison  with  those  held  by  the  feudal  lords  in  Europe. 

In  fact,  even  during  the  feudal  period  in  China  the 
feudal  lords,  as  a  rule,  never  held  lands  that  could  be 
compared  in  size  with  that  of  the  European  lords.  More- 


84  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [352 

over,  during  the  Tsing  dynasty  titles  of  nobility  were 
inherited  only  in  a  descending  degree.  The  rank  of  the 
heir  was  always  one  degree  below  that  of  his  immediate 
ancestor  *  until  it  reached  the  thirteenth,  which  is  the  last 
degree,  when  he  would  practically  become  merged  with  the 
body  of  the  community.  Outside  of  this  small  class  lands 
were  subjected,  as  has  already  been  pointed  out,  to  the  rule  of 
equal  division  among  the  male  children.  By  this  constant 
process  of  division  land  holdings  have  tended  to  become  so 
small  that  no  further  division  can  be  carried  out  advan- 
tageously. 

The  families,  however,  may  hold  together  and  refrain  for 
a  few  generations  from  dividing  the  lands,  and  considerable 
tracts  of  lands  are  held  by  such  families.  There  is  also  a 
considerable  amount  of  land  held  by  public  and  private  in- 
stitutions, such  as  the  temples,  memorials  to  saints  and 
ancestors,  educational  institutions,  etc.  Such  lands  are  usu- 
ally leased  out  in  small  allotments  to  the  tenants.  In  the 
more  populous  parts  of  the  country  the  allotments  are 
usually  very  small.  The  manner  in  which  leases  are  made 
differs  from  place  to  place.  The  relation  between  land- 
lord and  tenant  is,  however,  purely  an  economic  one.  The 
lease  is  almost  invariably  entered  into  at  will  and  is  usually 
for  a  short  period  of  time.  The  rent  is  in  some  cases  paid 
in  money  and  in  others  in  produce.  If  in  money  it  is  usually 
fixed  at  so  much  per  year  and  when  in  kind  at  a  fixed,' 
proportion  of  the  principal  crop.  On  the  best  land  the 
rent  is  about  one-half  the  annual  product  and  diminishes 
with  the  quality  of  the  soil.  Most  of  the  land  yields 
one  or  more  subsidiary  crops  in  the  course  of  the  year, 
besides  the  principal  crop;  but  these  usually  belong  to 
the  tenants,  rent  being  taken  only  on  the  principal  crop.  It 

1  Ta  Tsing  Hiue  Tien,  vol.  i,  pp.  1-6. 


353]  MODES  OF  ACQUIRING  LANDS  85 

is  the  custom  to  thresh  out  the  crop  immediately  on  its  being 
harvested,  and  the  landlord's  share  is  handed  over  at  once 
to  his  agent,  who  takes  good  care  to  be  on  the  spot  to  re- 
ceive it.  Rent  is  thus  seldom  or  never  in  arrears  and  evic- 
tions are  very  rare.  Outside  of  the  rent  the  tenant  owes 
the  lord  practically  no  further  obligation.  He  is  in  no  way 
bound  to  the  soil.  The  position  of  the  Chinese  tenant  is, 
therefore,  on  the  whole  much  better  than  that  of  the  Hindu 
or  the  Russian  peasant. 

The  tax,  as  we  have  seen,  is  paid  by  the  landlord.  Ac- 
cording to  the  Chinese  law  the  landlord  should  share  with 
his  tenant  to  the  extent  of  three-tenths  of  the  tax  when  it  is 
remitted  by  the  government  either  as  a  result  of  the  failure 
of  the  crop  or  as  a  special  favor  to  the  people  on  certain 
occasions.  It  seems  to  be  assumed  by  the  Chinese  law  that 
part  of  the  land  tax,  to  the  extent  of  one-third,  is  shifted 
by  the  landlord  to  his  tenant,  who  is  therefore  entitled  to 
deduct  that  amount  from  the  rent  when  the  tax  is  remitted 
by  the  government. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  NATURE  AND  THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  LAND  TAX 
UNDER  THE  TSING  DYNASTY 

THE  land  tax  of  the  Tsing  dynasty  (1644-1911)  is  in 
part  a  heritage  from  the  preceding  dynasty  and  in  part  a 
development  peculiarly  its  own.  It  consists  of  a  number  of 
contributions  and  taxes  which  were  in  course  of  time  amal- 
gamated into  one  single  levy,  called  in  Chinese  tien-fu,  or 
general  land  tax.  Some  of  these  contributions  were  in  for- 
mer times  incidental  to  the  holdings  of  land,  while  others 
were  assessed  independently.  Again,  some  of  them  were 
originally  paid  in  produce  or  money  while  others  were  paid 
in  service.  There  are  no  less  than  four  distinct  elements  in 
the  so-called  land  tax  of  China  in  the  period  under  discus- 
sion, namely,  (i)  the  land  tax  proper,  (2)  the  grain  tribute, 
(3)  the  poll  tax,  (4)  the  surtax.  Let  us  discuss  in  detail 
these  four  components  in  the  order  presented. 

The  Land  Tax  Proper.  The  land  tax  proper  of  the 
Tsing  dynasty  is  in  the  main  a  heritage  f  ronv  the  preceding 
dynasty.  It  has  been  shown  in  the  preceding  chapters  that 
toward  the  end  of  the  Ming  dynasty,  when  the  weak  em- 
peror was  tottering  on  his  throne  and  the  country  was 
filled  with  disorder,  there  were  imposed  on  the  land  a 
number  of  extra  burdens,  among  which  were  the  "  Three 
Supplies."  These  extra  levies  amounted  in  some  cases  to 
several  times  the  regular  tax,  and  were  often  explained  by 
Chinese  historians  as  one  of  the  causes  leading  to  the 

1  Cf.  supra,  pp.  53-54- 
86  [354 


255]          THE  NATURE  AND  THE  DEVELOPMENT  87 

downfall  of  the  dynasty.  When  the  Manchu  dynasty  came 
to  the  throne  it  Abolished  all  these  extra  levies,  in  line  with 
the  traditional  policy  of  conciliating  the  people  by  les- 
sening their  burdens  when  a  new  dynasty  came  into  power. 
The  rates  which  had  obtained  during  the  reign  of  Wan-Li 
and  Tien-Chi,  before  the  period  of  disorder,  were  restored. 
Moreover,  many  attempts  were  made  in  the  early  part  of 
the  dynasty  to  improve  the  system.  Some  of  the  reforms 
were  sound  in  principle  and  it  is  to  be  regretted  that  they 
were  not  retained  in  the  later  years.  A  new  survey  and 
valuation  of  the  land  was  made  in  the  reign  of  Shun-Chi 
( 1644-1662)  and  provisions  were  also  made  for  re- valuation 
of  lands  subject  to  frequent  changes  every  five  years  and  of 
ordinary  lands  every  ten  years.  The  result  of  the  first  sur- 
vey was  embodied  in  each  district  in  a  book  commonly 
known  as  the  book  of  "  fish  scale,"  a  term  derived  from  the 
appearance  of  the  map  attached  to  the  book.  The  Board  of 
Revenue  also  kept  the  results  of  the  survey  of  the  various 
districts  in  what  was  known  as  Chang-Liang-Shih  or  Sur- 
vey Book.  A  uniform  unit  of  measuring  land  by  the  bow 
was  adopted.  The  bow  was  equal  to  five  lineal  feet,  and 
two  hundred  and  forty  square  bow  were  declared  to  be  a 
mow.1  The  mow  was  fixed  to  be  the  unit  of  land  measure- 
ment throughout  the  country  except  in  Manchuria  where  the 
tie'n  and  the  sien  were  allowed  to  be  used.  Both  the  tien 
and  the  sien  are,  however,  simple  multiples  of  the  mow,  the 
former  being  equal  approximately  to  six  mow  and  the  latter 
to  twenty-four  mow.  In  the  twelfth  year  of  Shun-Chi 
(1656)  this  basic  unit  of  measurement,  namely,  the  bow, 
was  ordered  to  be  manufactured  by  the  Board  of  Revenue 
and  distributed  to  the  various  districts.2  Another  law  was 

1  One  Chinese  mow  is  equivalent  to  approximately  one-sixth  of  an 
English  acre. 

2  Shih  Li,  bk.  clxx,  f .  8  and  cf.  infra,  p.  122,  footnote. 


83  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [356 

enacted  in  the  eleventh  year  of  the  reign  of  Chien-Lung 
(1747)  to  enforce  this  uniform  unit  of  measurement1 

Besides  the  adoption  of  the  unit  of  measurement  and 
the  survey  of  the  lands  Emperor  Kang-Chi  also  compiled 
three  monumental  books.  The  first  was  known  as  the  Com- 
plete Book  of  Revenue  and  constitutes  what  we  may  to-day 
call  a  tax-roll,  besides  containing  other  information  concern- 
ing the  revenue  of  the  empire.  The  book  took  the  emperor, 
we  are  told,  ten  years  to  compile.  The  second  book  was 
known  as  Chie  Lieh  Chih,  or  Book  of  Population.  It  con- 
tained the  number  of  families  and  the  number  of  taxable 
heads  in  the  various  districts  of  the  empire.  The  third  book 
was  called  the  "  Yellow  Book/'  which  was  to  be  compiled 
every  year  and  to  form  a  current  supplement  to  the  Book  of 
Revenues.2 

In  order  to  prevent  irregular  practices  on  the  part  of  the 
tax-collectors  several  very  interesting  and  important  changes 
in  the  system  of  collection  were  introduced.  After  the  sur- 
vey was  completed  the  district  magistrates  were  ordered  to 
make  a  tax-roll  for  every  ten,  or  sometimes  five,  families, 
which  was  to  give  the  amount  of  land  possessed  by  each  of 
the  families,  the  rates  of  assessment  on  the  land  and  the 
total  amount  due  from  each  family.  These  tax-rolls  were 
to  be  posted  in  the  villages  where  the  tax-payers  could  easily 
see  them.  The  tax-bill  for  each  individual  family  was 
made  out  in  quadruplicate.  One  copy  was  to  be  forwarded 
to  the  prefect  for  checking,  one  to  be  kept  by  the  collector 
for  reference,  one  to  be  retained  by  the  taxpayer,  and  the 
fourth  to  be  deposited  in  a  box  in  front  of  the  magistrate's 
yamen  by  the  taxpayer  when  he  paid  the  tax.  The  tax  was 
not  to  be  collected  by  the  runners  of  the  yamen,  but  de- 

1  Ta  Tsing  Tung  Tien,  bk.  i,  ff.  3-4.    Cf.  also  Ta  Tsing  Tung  Tien, 
bk.  vii,  f.  26. 

2  Shih  Li,  bk.  clxxiv,  passim. 


THE  NATURE  AND  THE  DEVELOPMENT      89 

posited  in  a  sealed  box  placed  during  the  period  of  collec- 
tion in  front  of  the  yamen  or  in  some  other  public  place. 
These  tax  boxes  were  not  to  be  opened  except  in  the  pres- 
ence of  the  district  magistrate.  In  case  the  amount  de- 
posited by  the  taxpayer  was  found  short  of  the  required 
amount,  the  orginal  sum  was  handed  back  to  the  taxpayer, 
who  would  then  make  a  new  deposit  at  the  box.  No  tax- 
collector  was  allowed  to  receive  money  from  the  taxpayer.1 

The  principles  underlying  these  measures  were  certainly 
sound,  and  with  a  new  strong  government  at  the  head 
some  of  the  old  irregularities  were  at  first  eliminated. 
But  as  time  went  on,  the  rules  were  either  allowed  to 
lapse  or  new  methods  of  corruption  were  resorted  to  by  the 
collectors.  In  the  third  year  of  his  reign  Emperor  Yung- 
Chen  in  his  edict  described  the  situation  of  tax  collection  as 
again  deplorable  and  said  that  various  illegal  acts,  such  as 
altering  the  tax  bills,  secretly  opening  the  collection  boxes 
and  under-reporting  the  number  of  taxpayers,  were  prac- 
ticed by  the  tax  collectors.2  A  series  of  laws  was  passed 
during  this  and  the  succeeding  reigns  to  enforce  the  system 
introduced  at  the  beginning  of  the  dynasty. 

Of  all  the  laws  that  were  passed  in  regard  to  the  subject 
of  taxation  and  revenue  in  general  during  the  Tsing  dynasty 
none  was  more  important  than  that  enacted  in  the  fifty-first 
year  of  the  reign  of  Kang-Hsi  (1713)  which  became  known 
as  the  "  permanent  settlement."  3  This  law  declared  that 
the  number  of  taxable  heads  in  the  country,  as  shown  by 
the  census  of  the  fiftieth  year  of  the  reign,  and  the  land  tax* 
was  to  be  fixed  and  immutable  for  all  time.  The  tax  became 
practically  an  apportioned  tax,  the  amount  collectible  from 
each  district  being  based  on  the  returns  of  1713.  In  theory 

1  Ta  Tsing  Tung  Tien,  op.  cit.,  bk.  vii,  ff.  23-26. 

2  Ta  Tsing  Tung  Kao,  bk.  iii,  f.  15. 

3  Cf.  infra,  pp.  99-100. 


00  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [358 

this  law  was  observed  to  the  last  day  of  the  Tsing  dynasty. 
It  is  true  that  since  1713  the  land  tax  has  increased  probably 
several  times  over ;  but  the  increases  were  made  under  vari- 
ous disguises,  which  we  shall  discuss  under  the  topic  of 
surtax.  The  nominal  rates,  then,  of  the  tax  for  the  last 
two  centuries  of  the  Tsing  dynasty  were  based  on  those 
imposed  in  the  year  1713. 

These  rates  are  given  in  the  Ta  Tsing  Hwei  Tien  Shih  Li 
in  full.1  Theoretically,  they  were  determined  according  to 
the  "  richness  and  meagreness  "  of  the  land.  The  lands  in 
each  province  were  divided,  in  the  first  place,  into  from  three 
to  twelve  kinds ;  and  for  the  most  part  each  kind  of  land  was 
designated  by  a  different  name.  Some  of  these  names  have 
historical  and  others  fiscal  significance.  No  two  provinces 
have  the  same  classification.  Each  kind  of  land  was  then 
divided  into  three  classes  and  each  class  subdivided  into 
three  grades  according  to  the  fertility  of  the  soil.  The  tax 
consists  almost  invariably  of  two  parts,  one  payable  in 
money  and  the  other  in  rice,  wheat,  millet,  beans  or  other 
produce.  The  payment  in  kind  sometimes  consists  of 
three  or  four  different  kinds  of  produce,  each  at  a  given 
rate.  But  although  each  kind  of  land  was  divided  into  nine 
grades,  each  with  a  different  rate  of  taxation,  the  central 
government  set  only  a  maximum  and  a  minimum  rate  for 
each  kind  of  land,  and  the  determination  of  the  actual 
amount  or  rate  to  be  imposed  on  each  grade  of  land  was  left 
to  the  district  magistrates. 

The  complexity  of  the  rates  can  be  easily  seen  by  a  peru- 
sal of  Book  162  of  Ta  Tsing  Hwei  Tien  Shih  Li,  which 
contains  the  official  rates  by  provinces.  In  Chihli,  for  ex- 
ample, there  were  no  less  than  twelve  kinds  of  lands,  among 
which  were  min-fu-tien*  or  "  people's  land,"  subject  to  a 

1  Cf.  Shih  Li,  bk.  clxii,  passim. 

2  Cf.  Finance  of  the  Republic,  vol.  i,  pp.  236-245. 


359]          THE  NATURE  AND  THE  DEVELOPMENT  9I 

tax,  varying  from  Tls.  0.0081  to  Tls.  0.013  m  silver,  one 
sheng  to  ten  sheng  of  rice  and  .908  to  4  sheng  of  beans  per 
mow;  tun-tien  "  military  land  "  which  was  subject  to  a  tax 
of  Tls.  0.007  to  °-°783>  0.879  to  9-072  sheng  of  rice  and 
0.438  to  3.6  sheng  of  beans  and  192  to  417  bundles  of 
straw;  etc.  In  Kiangsu  the  min-fu-tien  was  taxed  at  Tls. 
0.015  to  0.106,  of  silver,  0.21  to  7.10  sheng  of  rice,  .050 
to  .080  sheng  of  wheat  and  .080  to  .910  sheng  of  beans  and 
the  min-ti  or  "  ordinary  land  "  was  taxed  at  Tl.  0.0089  to1 
0.6300,  .790  to  5.900  sheng  of  rice  and  .080  to  .230  sheng 
of  wheat.  Such  a  complication  of  rates  was  by  no  means 
exceptional  but,  on  the  contrary,  quite  typical.  Under  such 
conditions  the  wonder  is  not  that  the  land  tax  was  admin- 
istered so  badly  but  that  it  worked  at  all. 

In  theory,  therefore,  the  tax  was  payable  partly  in  produce 
and  partly  in  kind,  but,  as  will  be  shown  later  in  the  dis- 
cussion, part  of  the  money  payment  in  all  except  four  prov- 
inces was  required  to  be  remitted  to  Peking,  the  rest  being 
retained  by  the  province  for  provincial  expenditure.  The 
collection  in  produce  was  retained  by  the  provinces  for  pro- 
vincial expenditure  in  thirteen  out  of  the  twenty-one  prov- 
inces. The  other  eight  provinces  situated  in  the  great 
Yangzte  Valley  were  required  to  send  all  the  produce  col- 
lected to  Peking,  and  the  grain  thus  sent  became  known  as 
the  "  grain  tributes."  The  reason  that  these  eight  provinces 
were  required  to  send  the  grains  to  Peking  is  twofold.  In 
the  first  place,  they  were  the  best  grain-producing  provinces 
of  the  country,  and  in  the  second  place  they  were  so  situated 
that  transportation  to  Peking  was  least  costly.  Three  of 
these  eight  provinces  are  traversed  by  the  great  inland  high- 
way of  China,  the  Grand  Canal,  and  the  other  five  are  so 
situated  that  connection  can  be  easily  made  with  the  great 
Yangtze  River.  The  theoretical  rates  of  the  tax  in  kind 
were  the  same  for  the  twenty-one  provinces.  But  the  tax! 


92  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [360 

payers  in  the  tribute-paying  provinces  had  to  pay  the  cost  of 
transporting  the  grains  to  the  Capital  and  this  constituted 
the  difference  between  these  two  groups  of  provinces. 

The  Grain  Tribute.  According  to  the  statutory  laws  of 
the  Manchu  dynasty  there  were  five  different  kinds  of  trib- 
utes in  grain  required,  namely:  (i)  the  principal  tribute, 
(2)  the  auxiliary  tribute,  (3)  the  white-rice  tribute,  (4) 
the  millet  tribute,  and  (5)  the  black-bean  tribute.  The 
amount  of  the  principal  tribute  required  was,  according  to 
the  statutes,  3,300,000  shihs  of  grain  to  be  sent  to  the  gran- 
aries in  Peking  for  the  maintenance  of  the  Banner  troops, 
of  which  there  were  about  200,000.  The  auxiliary  tribute 
consisted  of  272,650  shihs  of  grain  to  be  sent  to  Tungchow, 
a  city  fifteen  miles  from  Peking,  for  the  use  of  the  princes 
and  officials  in  Peking.  The  white-rice  tribute,  which  was 
sent  partly  to  Peking  and  partly  to  Tungchow  for  the  use 
of  the  imperial  household  and  the  tributaries  from  the  de- 
pendencies, amounted  to  135,225  shih  of  white  rice  collected 
entirely  from  Kiangsu  and  Chekiang.  The  tribute  in  millet 
was  required  for  the  use  of  the  imperial  household,  amount- 
ing to  9849  shih  of  millet.  The  black-bean  tribute  was 
collected  from  the  two  bean-producing  provinces,  namely, 
Shantung  and  Honan,  for  the  feeding  of  the  horses  of  the 
troops  in  the  north,  the  amount  required  being  208,199  shih. 
These  were  the  amounts  originally  required  to  be  sent  to 
Peking  annually.  They  were  apportioned  among  the  eight 
so-called  grain-tribute  provinces,  the  amount  required  of 
each  province  being  given  in  the  statutes. 

These  amounts  did  not,  however,  constitute  the  total  re- 
quired of  the  provinces.  There  were  a  number  of  extra 
levies  which  were  added  one  after  the  other  in  the  course 
of  time  to  the  principal  amounts  originally  required.  In 
order  to  show  the  confusion  of  the  system  several  of 
these  extra  levies  will  be  mentioned  here.  In  the  first 


361]          THE  NATURE  AND  THE  DEVELOPMENT  93 

place,  there  was  levied  the  so-called  "  wastage  charge,"  the 
amount  of  which  varied  from  25  to  40  per  cent  of  the  prin- 
cipal amount.  The  rate  was  different  for  the  several 
"  tributes,"  as  indicated  in  the  preceding  paragraph,  and 
different  for  the  several  provinces.  A  small  part  of  this 
wastage  charge  was  allowed  to  be  retained  by  the  transpor- 
tation forces  for  their  maintenance,  the  main  part  was  re- 
quired to  be  delivered  at  the  government  granaries.  Sec- 
ondly, there  was  a  "  light-weight  charge  "  the  rate  of  which 
was  1 6  per  cent  for  Honan  and  Shangtung,  26  per  cent  for 
Kiangsu  and  Anhwei,  and  22  per  cent  for  the  other  four 
provinces.  These  rates,  however,  applied  only  to  the  "  prin- 
cipal tribute."  On  the  other  kinds  of  "  tribute  "  the  light- 
weight charge  was  fixed  at  two  sheng  for  each  tao  or  20  per 
cent,  which  was  commuted  into  money  payment  at  the  rate 
of  Tl.  o.oi  for  the  two  sheng.  Thirdly,  there  was  a  "  cargo 
wastage"  charge,  the  rate  of  which  varied  from  15  to  23 
per  cent.  In  the  fourth  place,  there  was  a  "  transportation 
charge  "  which  was  originally  collected  to  defray  the  ex- 
penses of  transporting  the  grain  to  the  north,  but  later  ap- 
propriated by  the  central  government,  leaving  the  officials 
in  charge  of  the  transportation  to  collect  what  they  could 
from  the  people. 

In  the  earliest  part  of  the  Tsing  dynasty  the  full  amounts 
were  required  to  be  sent  to  the  north  in  the  form  of  grain, 
no  province  or  district  being  allowed  to  commute  them  into 
money  payment.  But  soon  it  was  found  that  some  districts, 
stricken  with  drought  or  famine,  were  unable  to  remit  their 
full  quota  in  kind.  The  emperor  in  such  cases,  "  out  of  his 
consideration  not  to  deprive  the  suffering  people  of  their 
grains,"  inaugurated  the  practice  of  permitting  such  dis- 
tricts to  commute  the  "tribute"  into  a  money  payment.  The 
commutation  might  be  in  whole  or  in  part  and  was  usually 
valid  only  for  a  short  period.  The  bulk  of  the  "  tributes  " 


94  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [362 

continued  to  be  sent  in  kind  until  after  the  Taiping  Rebel- 
lion (1850-1865)  which  threw  practically  the  entire  revenue 
system  into  disorder.  During  this  period  of  confusion  it 
was,  of  course,  impossible  to  collect  and  transport  the  grain 
to  the  north,  and  it  was  found  advantageous  and  even  nec- 
essary for  the  government  to  allow  commutation.  During 
the  twelve-year  period  1858-1870  six  out  of  the  eight  prov- 
inces commuted  their  tributes  into  money  payments. 

Commutation  would  seem  to  offer  an  opportunity  to  con- 
solidate these  various  payments  into  one  single  item  and  do 
away  with  some  of  the  vicious  practices  which  had  devel- 
oped. But  nothing  of  this  sort  was  done.  Instead  the  rates 
of  commutation  introduced  still  more  absurdities  into  the 
already  most  complicated  system.  The  rates  of  commuta- 
tion adopted  varied  from  province  to  province  and  from 
district  to  district,  and  sometimes  even  from  one  piece 
of  land  to  another  in  the  same  district.1  Further,  in  some 
places  the  rate  of  commutation  was  given  in  copper  cash 
while  in  others  in  taels. 

The  value  of  the  grain  tributes  received  by  the  govern- 
ment at  Peking  has  been  estimated  at  widely  varying  figures. 
George  Jamieson  puts  it  at  a  little  over  five  million  dollars,2 
H.  B.  Morse  puts  it  at  about  seven  millions,3  and  Sir  N.  J. 
Hannen  puts  it  at  six  millions  and  a  half.4  These  figures 
were  all  based  on  the  prices  at  the  end  of  the  last  century. 
When  the  Republic  was  established  new  rates  of  commuta- 
tion based  on  the  current  market  value  were  established  and 
the  receipts  from  these  commuted  tributes  were  estimated  at 
approximately  seventeen  million  dollars.5  The  discrepancy 

1  Morse,  Trade  and  Administration  of  China,  pp.  93-4. 
^  Ibid. 

3  Ibid.,  pp.  91-94. 

4  J.  Edkins,  The  Revenue  and  Taxation  of  the  Chinese  Empire,  p.  55. 

5  Finance  of  the  Republic,  vol.  i,  p.  121. 


363]          THE  NATURE  AND  THE  DEVELOPMENT  95 

between  the  early  and  the  later  figures  cannot,  of  course,  be 
explained  entirely  by  the  difference  in  the  price  of  the 
grains.  Part  of  the  discrepancy  is  perhaps  due  to  the  degree 
of  stringency  with  which  the  central  government  enforced 
the  collection  of  the  tributes. 

These  figures  represent  merely  the  amounts  that  were 
turned  over  to  the  central  government,  which  constituted, 
however,  only  a  fraction  of  the  actual  amount  collected 
from  the  people.  We  have  no  way  of  ascertaining  the  latter 
figures;  but  according  to  the  estimates  of  two  of  the  best 
foreign  authorities  on  the  revenue  of  China  the  value  of 
the  grain  tributes  actually  collected  at  the  close  of  the  last 
century  was  about  twenty-five  million  dollars  in  the  terms 
of  the  prices  prevailing  at  that  time.1 

The  Poll  Tax.  The  poll  tax  in  China  was  first  intro- 
duced in  the  Han  dynasty  in  lieu  of  military  and  other  ser- 
vices which  were  required  of  the  able-bodied  man  under  the 
Chow  dynasty.  The  tax  was  continued  by  the  succeeding 
dynasties  in  one  form  or  another.  The  system  that  existed 
in  the  first  part  of  the  Tsing  dynasty  was  substantially  the 
same  as  that  of  the  Ming  dynasty. 

Theoretically,  every  able-bodied  man  of  the  empire  was 
liable  to  the  tax,  the  rate  of  which  varied  considerably  from 
province  to  province.  In  Chihli  it  was  from  Tls.  0.03  to 
2.657,  and  in  Honan  it  was  from  Tls.  o.oi  to  1.20  per  head, 
Tls.  2.657  being  the  highest  rate  and  Tl.  o.oi  the  lowest  in 
the  eighteen  provinces.2  For  the  purpose  of  levying  the 
poll  tax  the  people  were  divided  into  four  classes,  each  of 
which  was  subdivided  into  three  grades.  The  rate  that  each 
individual  had  to  pay  was  based  on  what  the  Chinese  called 
"  material  strength  "  of  the  individual  or  what  the  modern 

1  See  Parker,  H.  E.,  China,  pp.  106-8  and  Morse,  op.  cit.,  pp.  91-94. 

2  The  rate  for  Shantung  was  Tls.  0.20  to  0.35 ;  for  Hunan,  Tls.  0.03 
to  0.835. 


0,6  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [364 

financiers  would  call  ability.  In  theory  the  tax  was  sound, 
but  in  practice  it  was  a  vexatious  measure.  The  people 
were  divided  into  classes  and  grades  but  no  definite  rate  or 
rates  were  assigned  to  each  class  or  grade.  The  rate  for 
each  district  was  in  practice  left  in  the  hands  of  the  district 
magistrate  as  in  the  case  of  the  land  tax.  It  varied  all  the 
way  from  the  minimum,  to  the  maximum  rates  prescribed 
for  each  of  the  provinces. 

For  the  purpose  of  levying  this  tax  a  census  was  taken 
every  five  years.  This  census  differed  from  our  modern 
census  in  that  it  included  only  the  able-bodied  men  between 
the  ages  of  sixteen  and  sixty.  The  method  by  which  this 
census  was  taken  is  very  interesting.  Every  one  hundred 
and  ten  families  were  organized  into  a  li,  at  the  head  of 
which  was  appointed  a  li-chang  or  /f-headman.  He  was 
responsible  to  the  district  magistrate  for  the  poll-taxes  of 
his  unit  besides  performing  other  important  functions  in 
connection  with  the  public  affairs  of  the  li.1  The  heads  of 
the  ten  families  having  the  greatest  number  of  ding,  or 
able-bodied  men,  were  chosen  to  be  the  chia-chang  or  head 
of  the  chiat  and  to  each  of  the  ten  chia-chang  was  assigned 
ten  families.  The  widower,  the  widow  and  the  orphan  were 
called  "  odds  "  and  were  not  included  in  the  one  hundred 
and  ten  families.  At  the  time  of  census-taking  every  family 
was  required  to  report  the  number  of  ding  or  taxable  heads 
in  his  chia,  including  his  own  family,  to  the  li-chang  or  li- 
headman.  The  li  were  classed  into  urban,  sub-urban  and 
rural,  and  the  headman  of  each  was  to  transmit  the  returns 
that  he  had  collected  from  the  ten  chia-chang  within  his 
jurisdiction  to  the  district  magistrate.  The  district,  as  we 
have  pointed  out.  was  and  is  the  most  important  unit  of  ad- 
ministration in  China.  The  district  magistrate  then  turned 

1  Ta  Tsing  Wen  Hsien  Tung  Kao,  bk.  xix,  ff.  7-8.     Also  Ross,  The 
Reigning  Dynasty  of  China,  p.  645. 


365]          THE  NATURE  AND  THE  DEVELOPMENT  97 

over  to  the  prefect  the  returns  of  his  district,  who  in  turn 
reported  to  the  provincial  treasurer.  Thus  "  each  district 
magistrate  has  a  general  register  for  all  the  li  in  his  district ; 
and  the  provincial  authority  one  for  all  districts  in  the 
province.  When  the  provincial  register  books  are  filled  up, 
they  are  sent  to  the  Board  of  Revenue,  at  Peking,  which 
literally  means  the  Board  of  Households."  * 

The  census  was  taken  every  fifth  year.  According  to  the 
first,  taken  in  the  eighteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  Shun-chi 
(1662),  the  number  of  ding  or  taxable  heads  in  the  empire 
was  2 1, 068,609. 2  The  number  increased  steadily  until  the 
fiftieth  year  of  the  reign  of  Kang-shih  (1712),  when  it 
reached  24, 621, 334. 3  In  that  year  the  total  amount  of  the 
poll-tax  collected  was  reported  in  round  numbers  to  be 
Tls.  5,500,000.*  The  average  rate  per  taxable  head 
amounts,  therefore,  to  approximately  Tls.  0.14.  The 
population  of  China  at  that  time  was  over  one  hundred 
millions,  probably  between  one  hundred  and  twenty  and 
one  hundred  and  fifty  millions.  The  number  of  taxable 
heads  constitutes,  therefore,  less  than  one-fifth  of  the  num- 
ber of  the  people.  We  have  not  been  able  to  find  any  record 
in  regard  to  the  rules  of  exemption  under  which  such  a 
large  portion  of  the  population  was  relieved  of  this  tax,  ex- 
cept that  the  family  of  an  official  was  exempted  from  the 
tax  for  three  generations  and  that  all  literati  who  had  passed 
the  first  competitive  examination  were  also  exempt.  Most 

1Ross,  op.  tit.,  p.  646. 

2  Ta  Tsing  Tung  Kao,  op.  cit.,  bk.  iii,  f.  2. 

'According  to  the  census  thus  taken  the  number  of  taxable  heads 
in  the  empire  were  as  follows : 

fShun-chi  i8th    year  (1662)       21,068,609 
Kang-shih  24th  (1686)       23,411,448 

Kang-shih  soth  (1712)       24,621,334 

Kang-shih  6oth  (1722)      27,355,462 

*  Shih  Li,  bk.  clvii,  ff.  3-4. 


98  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [366 

probably  each  family  was  subject  to  furnish  only  one  or 
more  taxable  heads  according  to  the  amount  of  land  owned.1 
The  tax  remained  in  force  until  the  fifty-first  year  of  the 
reign  of  Kang-chi  (1713)  when  an  imperial  decree  declar- 
ing that  the  number  of  taxable  heads  for  the  empire,  as 
shown  in  the  census  of  the  last  year,  shall  be  fixed  and  im- 
mutable for  all  times.  "  In  reading  over  the  returns  on 
population,"  says  that  emperor  in  his  decree,  "  we  see  that 
our  governors  have  not  reported  all  the  increases  of  people 
in  the  Empire.  As  our  Empire  has  been  enjoying  peace 
and  prosperity  for  a  long  time,  such  increases  must  have 
been  very  considerable.  But  it  would  be  unjust  for  us  to 
increase  our  tax  in  proportion  to  the  increases  of  people, 
for  our  land  from  which  the"  people  obtain  their  income  is  a 
fixture  and  does  not  increase  with  the  increase  of  population. 
Let  it  therefore  be  decreed  that  the  number  of  heads  liable 
to  the  poll  tax,  as  shown  in  the  last  census:,  shall  not  be  in- 
creased nor  decreased  in  the  future,  and  that  people  born 
after  this  day  shall  be  exempted  from  the  tax.  Our  treas- 
ury is  now  very  rich.  We  have  granted  remission  of  taxes 
to  the  people  amounting  to  millions  of  taels.  Our  revenue 
will  be  always  sufficient.  Our  purpose  in  requiring  the  re- 
ports on  the  increase  of  people  is  not  to  increase  our  revenue 
but  to  know  the  actual  number  of  people  under  our  rule."  2 

1  John   Ross,  in   his  book  already  referred  to,   considers   the  ding 
or  taxable  head   as  representing,  theoretically,  ten   families.    "  Every 
li",    he    says,    "was    divided    into    a    hundred    and    ten    families    or 
hoo;  only  ten  of  these  were  called  ding  who  were  the   subjects  of 
the  poll  tax  .  .  .  The  ding  is  the  arbitrary  poll  tax  unit,  ten  to  a  square 
li.  (which  contained  one  hundred  and  ten  families)"  (pp.  645-6).    Mr. 
Ross  is  seriously  mistaken  here.     If  the  ding  represents  ten  families, 
on  the  average,  then  there  must  have  been  246,213,340  families  in  China 
at  that  time,  since  there  were  24,621,334  taxable  heads;  which  would  be 
absurd,  as  the  population  at  that  time  was  less  than  one  hundred  and 
fifty  millions.     The  ding  was  merely  the  individual  who  was  subject  to 
the  tax.    A  family  might  have  one  or  more  ding  or  none. 

2  Vide  Shih  Li,  bk.  clvii,  f.  i. 


367]    THE  NATURE  AND  THE  DEVELOPMENT      99 

In  order  to  carry  out  this  law  it  was  also  provided  that 
"  except  in  the  cases  where  the  number  of  ding  or  taxable 
heads  assigned  to  each  family  was  based  on  the  amount  of 
land  possessed,  when  the  ding  of  the  family  was  discharged 
on  account  of  death  or  attainment  of  the  age  limit  one  of 
the  tax-exempted  men  will  be  required  to  succeed  him. 
Should  the  family  be  unable  to  furnish  the  required  ding, 
one  of  its  kindred  families  will  then  be  required  to  appoint 
one."  *  From  this  statement  we  see  that  the  unit  of  the 
poll  tax  was  the  family  rather  than  the  individual,  and  the 
number  of  ding  required  of  each  family  was  based  on  the 
number  of  the  people  in  the  family  or  the  amount  of  land 
owned.  • 

In  this  decree  we  also  find  the  reasons  for  the  Emperor's 
taking  that  unusual  and  important  step.  In  the  first  place,  the 
decree  was  issued  in  order  to  obtain  the  reports  of  the 
actual  increase  of  population  from  the  provincial  authorities 
who  had  not  done  so  hitherto  in  order  to  avoid  the  increase 
of  the  amount  of  the  poll  tax  for  their  respective  provinces. 
In  the  second  place,  there  was  a  sufficiency  of  reve- 
nues 2  and  the  emperor,  in  keeping  with  the  traditional 
practices  of  Chinese  benevolent  rulers,  desired  to  conciliate 
and  please  the  people  by  lightening  their  burden. 

The  permanent  settlement  of  1713  is  important  for  sev- 
eral reasons.  In  the  first  place,  it  practically  did  away; 
with  the  old  system  of  taking  a  census  of  the  number 
of  the  people  liable  to  poll  tax  and  led  to  the  establishment 
of  the  modern  methods  of  census  taking,  which  were  intro- 
duced in  the  early  part  of  the  reign  of  Chen-Lung  (1736- 
1796)  and  continued  for  over  a  century  until  the  time  of 
the  Taiping  Rebellion  at  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 

lCf.  Shih  Li,  bk.  clvii,  passim. 

2  Parker,  op.  cit.  estimated  that  the  surplus  accumulated  in  the  treas- 
uries at  that  time  amounted  to  no  less  than  Tls.  70,000,000. 


I00  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [368 

tury.  This  census,  taken  at  frequent  intervals,  gives 
us  the  record  of  the  size  of  the  population  of  China  during 
this  period.  In  the  second  place,  the  establishment  of  the 
immutability  of  the  poll  tax  led  to  its  amalgamation  with 
the  land  tax.  Hitherto  the  tax  was  apportioned  among 
the  provinces,  as  the  land  tax  proper  was,  but  it  was  assessed 
independently  of  the  latter.  The  amount  for  each  province 
was  now  declared  immutable  and  it  was  a  natural  step  for 
the  government  to  amalgamate  it  with  the  land  tax  proper 
and  save  the  cost  of  collection.  In  the  third  place,  this  law, 
by  declaring  that  land  was  a  fixture  and  that  although  the 
number  of  people  may  increase,  the  number  of  taxable  heads 
who  derived  their  income  from  the  land  shall  not  be  in- 
creased, also  made  the  land  tax  immutable.  "  This  perma- 
nent settlement,  in  theory,  endures  to  this  day,  (the  last  day 
of  the  Manchu  dynasty)"  as  Morse  points  out;  "the  tax 
bill  for  each  lot  of  land  to-day  gives  the  rate  of  assessment 
of  1713,  and  the  returns  of  the  total  collection  are  based 
upon  the  permanent  settlement,  subject  to  authorized  reduc- 
tions for  the  effects  of  the  rebellion,  drought  and  flood, 
and  to  the  reaugmentation  on  discovery  when  reported  by 
the  provincial  authorities."  * 

Shortly  after  the  passage  of  the  permanent  settlement  the 
old  practice  of  taking  the  census  of  people  liable  to  the  poll 
tax  was  discontinued,  for  "  what  is  the  use,"  says  the  Em- 
peror, "  of  our  counting  the  taxable  heads  when  they  never 
increase,  and  untaxable  heads  when  they  pay  no  poll  tax  or 
land  tax  ?  I  want  to  know  how  many  human  souls  we  pos- 
sess." 2  Accordingly,  in  1746,  or  the  eleventh  year  of  the 
reign  of  Chen-Lung,  a  census  of  the  entire  population,  in- 
cluding all  ages  and  both  sexes,  was  taken.  This  census 
gave  the  number  of  the  people  in  the  empire  as  177,495,035 

1  Morse,  op.  cit,,  p.  82. 

2  Ta  Tsing  Tung  Kao,  bk.  xix,  f .  9. 


369]          THE  NATURE  AND  THE  DEVELOPMENT  IOi 

and  the  number  of  households  as  36,261,055,  or  approx- 
imately 4.6  persons  to  a  household.1  After  that  a  census  of 
the  entire  population  was  taken  regularly  every  third  year, 
although  with  some  interruptions,  for  over  a  century  until 
the  time  of  the  Taiping  Rebellion  which  threw  China  into  a 
state  of  war  for  nearly  two  decades.  According  to  this 
census  the  population  of  China  increased  rapidly,  although 
the  increases  were  interrupted  by  civil  wars  on  several 
occasions:  from  177,495^35  m  J74^  to  200,473,275  in 
1762;  268,238,181  in  1775;  284,033,755  in  1782;  332,000,- 
ooo  in  1805;  413,457,361  in  1841,  and  432,000,000  in 
l85i.2 

As  has  been  pointed  out,  the  amalgamation  of  the  poll  tax 
with  the  land  tax  was  a  natural  sequence  of  the  immutability 
of  the  former.  China  was  then  predominantly  an  agricul- 
tural country  and  the  chief  form  of  her  wealth  was  land. 
Both  the  land  tax  and  the  poll  tax  were  based  upon  the 
produce  of  the  land ;  and  since  the  amount  of  the  latter  ap- 
portioned to  each  province  was  fixed  for  all  time,  it  was  nat- 
ural that  the  poll  tax  should  be  amalgamated  with  the  land 
tax  proper.  As  was  pointed  by  one  of  the  ministers  of  the 
Emperor,  "  It  saved  the  cost  of  collection  and  freed  the 
poor  from  bearing  the  burden  of  the  tax  and  the  rich 
who  possess  land  from  vexation."  3  In  a  few  years  after 
the  permanent  settlement  was  enacted,  one  province  after 
another  amalgamated  the  tax  with  the  land  tax.  The  first 
province  to  take  this  step  was  Kwangtung,  which  distrib- 
uted its  quota  of  the  poll  tax  among  the  payers  of  the  land 

1  Ta  Tsing  Tung  Tien,  bk.  ix,  f.  35. 

3  Ta  Tsing  Tung  Kao,  bk.  xix,  passim.  For  later  figures  cf.  Rockhill, 
An  Inquiry  into  the  Population  of  China,  and  Werner,  Descriptive  So- 
ciology of  the  Chinese,  and  the  Census  of  1910  by  the  Chinese 
government. 

» Ta  Tsing  Tung  Kao,  bk.  xix,  f .  4. 


I02  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [370 

tax  at  the  rate  of  Tl.  0.164  to  every  tael  of  the  land  tax.1 
Chihli  amalgamated  it  with  the  land  tax  in  1723,*  and  by 
1730  all  the  provinces,  except  Shansi,  where  amalgamation 
did  not  take  place  until  1746,  distributed  their  respective 
quota  of  the  tax  on  the  land.  The  rate  of  apportionment, 
however,  varied  greatly  from  province  to  province.  In 
Fukien  it  was  from  Tl.  0.0527  to  0.312  for  land  held  under 
common  tenure,  and  Tl.  0.0083  to  O-J448  for  land  under 
military  tenure.  In  Shantung  it  was  uniformly  at  Tl.  0.115 
for  every  tael  of  the  land  tax  proper,  and  in  Honan  it  varied, 
according  to  the  locality,  from  Tl.  0.0117  to  0.207  f°r  every 
tael  of  the  land  tax  proper.8  These  varied  rates  added 
further  confusion  to  the  rates  of  the  land  tax,  which  were 
already  complicated. 

The  Surcharges.  In  the  discussion  of  the  land  tax  proper 
it  was  pointed  out  that  the  legal  rates  of  that  tax,  either  in 
money  or  in  kind,  for  the  last  two  hundred  years  of  the 
Tsing  dynasty  were  those  determined  by  the  law  of  1713, 
and  in  the  discussion  of  the  grain-tributes  it  was  shown 
how  the  rates  in  kind  in  the  eight  so-called  grain-tribute 
provinces  were  increased  in  the  course  of  time  by  additional 
charges  under  various  names.  The  following  pages  will 
make  clear  how  the  land  tax  proper,  which  was  declared 
immutable  by  the  law  of  1713,  was  increased  by  a  similar 
process,  and  how  these  charges,  which  were  at  first  extra- 
legal,  came  to  be  recognized  by  the  government. 

Among  the  various  surcharges  the  earliest,  and  perhaps 
also  the  most  important,  was  the  "  meltage  charge."  The 
origin  of  the  meltage  charge,  as  pointed  out  by  the  editors 
of  that  collection  of  documents  of  the  Tsing  dynasty  which 


'Ibid.,  f.  4. 
3  Ibid.,  f.  5. 


37 1  ]          THE  NATURE  AND  THE  DEVELOPMENT 

has  been  frequently  referred  to  in  this  study,  namely,  the 
Ta  Tsing  Wen  Hsien  Tung  Kao,  is  to  be  found  in  the  Ming 
dynasty  when  the  taxes  in  kind  began  to  be  commuted  into 
payment  in  silver.  "  The  silver  collected  from  the  people 
varied  greatly  in  fineness,  and  in  order  to  meet  the  degree  of 
fineness  required  by  the  Board  of  Revenue  at  Peking  the 
magistrates  had  to  collect  an  extra  rate  from  the  people. 
The  extra  rate  was  called  meltage  charge  and  was  similar  in 
character  to  the  wastage  charge  of  the  payment  in  grain. 
But  in  the  course  of  time  these  extra  rates  were  so  increased 
that  they  became  very  burdensome  to  the  people.  The 
magistrate  exacted  them  from  the  people  and  the  provincial 
governors  required  their  remittance  from  the  magistrate  as 
if  they  were  part  of  the  official  income."  1 

When  the  Tsing  dynasty  came  to  power  these  extra 
charges  were  abolished  and  laws  were  passed  forbidding  the 
magistrates  to  collect  them,  under  severe  penalty.2  In  order 
to  guard  against  the  violation  of  the  law  various  methods 
of  protection  against  irregularities  were  introduced,  some 
of  which  have  already  been  alluded  to.3  The  taxpayer,  for. 
instance,  was  required  to  write  with  "  his  own  hand  "  in  a 
book  the  amount  of  the  tax  that  he  paid.  The  books  were 
distributed  to  the  tax  collectors  by  the  provincial  treasurers 
and  were  to  be  returned  to  him  when  completed,  to  be 
checked  up  with  the  actual  returns  of  the  districts.  The 
magistrate  was  further  required  to  publish  a  tax  roll  for 
every  five  or  ten  families,  giving  the  amount  of  land  owned 
by  each  family,  its  location  and  the  amount  of  tax  assessed 
on  it.  These  rolls  were  to  be  posted  in  some  conspicuous 
public  place.  For  each  district  there  were  also  distributed 

1  Ibid.,  bk.  iii,  p.  12. 

2  Ta  Tsing  Tung  Kao,  bk.  iv,  f.  19. 

3  Cf.  supra,  pp.  88-89. 


104  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [372 

two  copies  of  the  "  Complete  Book  of  Revenue  "  which 
contained  the  amount  and  the  rates  of  the  tax  each  district 
in  the  empire  had  to  pay.  One  of  these  two  books  was  to 
be  placed  in  the  hioh-kian  or  educational  institute  of  the 
district  where  "  the  people  and  the  scholars  may  go  and 
examine  it."  1 

The  system  of  protection  thus  introduced  against  corrupt 
practices  and  irregularity  on  the  part  of  the  tax-collector  is 
certainly  thorough  and  ingenious  and  in  some  respects  com- 
pares favorably  with  modern  systems  of  tax  administration. 
Yet  it  failed  to  improve  the  situation.  Why?  The  funda- 
mental difficulty  appears  to  lie  in  the  fact  that,  in  spite  of 
the  various  means  of  publicity  and  methods  of  checking, 
the  government  made  no  adequate  provisions  for  the  main- 
tenance of  the  officials,  high  as  well  as  low,  and  for  the 
administration  of  the  local  governing  bodies.  The  sala- 
ries allowed  to  the  officials  of  the  Tsing  dynasty  were 
based  substantially  on  those  of  the  preceding  dynasty  and 
were  very  inadequate.  Nor  were  the  amounts  allowed 
for  the  administrative  expenses,  both  provincial  and 
local,  in  any  way  commensurate  with  the  actual  outlay. 
Each  official  was  practically  left  to  devise  a  system  of  reve- 
nue for  his  own  maintenance  and  for  that  of  the  administra- 
tion of  the  government  under  his  control.  "  The  legal  sal- 
aries and  allowances  are,  as  every  one  knows,  ridiculously 
inadequate  to  meet  the  absolute  requirements  of  the  local 
offices,  and  failing  to  get  them  increased,  they  square  the  ac- 
count by  simply  retaining  in  their  hands  sums  that  ought  to 
appear  as  revenue,  but  which,  in  part  at  least,  are  used  to 
meet  public  expenditure."  2  The  amount  of  taxes  that  a  dis- 
trict magistrate,  for  example,  was  required  to  remit  to 
Peking  represented  only  a  fraction,  a  small  fraction  in  some 

1  Ta  Tsing  Tung  Kao,  bk.  i,  f .  4. 
2Jamieson,  op.  cit.,  p.  10. 


373]  THE  NATURE  AND  THE  DEVELOPMENT  105 

places,  of  the  total  that  he  had  to  collect.  Besides  maintaining 
himself  and  his  administration  he  had  to  contribute,  directly 
or  indirectly,  toward  the  maintenance  of  the  prefecture  and 
the  provincial  authorities  and  their  administration.  Unless 
adequate  revenues  were  provided  for  these  expenses,  extra 
rates  could  not  be  prevented. 

Therefore,  in  spite  of  all  prohibitions,  the  surcharges 
under  one  name  or  another  continued  to  be  levied  until 
toward  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  Kang-Hsi  (1662- 
1722),  when  the  situation  had  become  so  serious  that  the 
emperor  was  obliged  to  interfere.  Laws  were  passed  re- 
quiring the  district  magistrates  to  turn  over  the  surcharges 
that  they  collected  to  the  provincial  authorities,  who  were 
given  power  to  appropriate  them  for  the  expenditure  of  the 
provincial  and  the  local  bodies.  Definite  rates  of  such 
charges  allowed  were  also  prescribed  for  the  provinces. 
For  Chihli  the  rate  was  fixed  at  from  Tl.  0.05  to  0.15  per 
tael  of  the  tax  collected.  For  Shantung  a  uniform  rate  of 
14  per  cent  of  the  tax  paid  in  money  and  10  per  cent  of 
the  tax  paid  in  kind  was  prescribed.  For  Shansi  the  rates 
allowed  varied  from  1^/2  to  13  per  cent  of  the  tax  paid  in 
money  and  20  to  40  per  cent  of  the  tax  paid  in  kind.  For 
the  other  provinces  similar  complicated  rates  were  fixed.1 

These  rates  were  little  more  than  nominal  rates  repre- 
senting a  fraction,  and  perhaps  a  very  small  fraction,  of  the 
surcharges  that  had  hitherto  been  collected  by  the  magis- 
trates and  their  subordinates.  The  effect  of  the  fixing  of 
the  rates  was  to  increase  the  amount  of  surcharges,  for,  in 
order  to  cover  the  amount  now  required  to  be  remitted  to 
the  provincial  authorities,  the  district  magistrates  had  to 
increase  the  amounts  of  their  collections.  Practically  it  was 

1  For  a  full  account  of  the  rates  in  the  provinces  and  the  districts 
cf.  Shih  Li,  bk.  clxx,  passim. 


106  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [374 

equivalent  to  an  increase  of  the  tax  rates  by  the  government. 

The  amount  of  the  surcharges  remitted  to  the  provincial 
authorities  was  at  first  set  aside  as  an  independent  item  to  be 
used  by  the  provincial  authorities  for  the  increase  of  the 
official  allowances  and  to  meet  certain  minor  and  specific 
items  of  expenditure.1  But  the  number  of  the  latter  assigned 
to  this  fund  had  so  increased  that  by  the  twenty-fifth  year  of 
the  reign  of  Chia-Ching  (1796-1820)  the  Board  reported 
that  in  the  eighteen  provinces  the  number  of  items  of  expen- 
diture of  definite  amount  assigned  to  be  paid  out  of  the  "sur- 
charges "  was  538  and  that  of  indefinite  amount  was  129* 
In  order  to  meet  these  charges,  the  amount  of  "surcharges" 
required  of  the  district  magistrates  had,  of  course,  to  be  in- 
creased, and  in  some  provinces  funds  from  other  sources 
were  regularly  appropriated  to  the  "surcharges"  to  cover  the 
deficiencies.3  It  was  not  until  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth 
century  that  the  returns  of  these  surcharges  were  amal- 
gamated with  the  regular  receipts  of  the  land  tax. 

The  surcharges  which  had  thus  been  recognized  by  law 
represented,  however,  only  a  small  fraction  of  the  amount 
actually  collected  from  the  people.  Under  the  cover  of 
"  collector s*  fees,  meltage  charge,  wastage  charge "  and 
other  ingenious  names,  the  rates  collected  from  the  taxpayers 
amounted  in  many  cases  to  several  times  the  original  rate 
assessed  in  1713.  The  exact  amount  of  these  surcharges, 
legal  as  well  as  extra-legal,  could  not  be  ascertained.  It  is 
certain,  however,  as  will  be  made  clear  in  the  chapter  on 
the  reform  of  the  tax,1  that  the  receipts  of  the  land  tax 
turned  into  the  treasury  during  the  latter  part  of  the  Tsing 

1  Shih  Li,  bk.  clxx,  f .  4. 

*  Ibid.,  f.  5.  The  provinces  in  which  such  appropriation  from  other 
sources  of  revenue  took  place  were  Shensi,  Kansu,  Yunan  and 
Szechwan.  See  Tung  Kao,  bk.  iii,  ff.  2-3  and  Tung  Tien,  bk.  vii,  f .  26. 

*Ibid.,  f.  2. 


375]          THE  NATURE  AND  THE  DEVELOPMENT  107 

dynasty  was  of  ridiculously  small  amount  when  compared 
with  what  it  should,  and  probably  did,  yield. 

In  this  somewhat  detailed  and  laborious  discussion,  it  has 
been  shown  that  the  so-called  land  tax  in  China  is  a  com- 
plex historical  product.  It  consists  of  the  original  land  rate 
which  was  declared  immutable  by  the  permanent  settlement 
of  1713,  the  poll  tax  which  was  amalgamated  with  the 
land  tax  since  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  century,  the 
grain  tribute  which  was  paid  originally  as  part  of  the  tax 
but  afterwards  became  a  distinct  charge  on  land,  and  the  so- 
called  surcharges,  legal  as  well  as  extra-legal,  which  were 
added  one  after  the  other  during  the  course  of  the  two 
hundred  years  after  the  immutability  of  the  land  tax  was 
declared.  The  extreme  complexity  of  the  rates  has  given 
rise  to  all  sorts  of  practices  of  irregularity  and  corruption 
in  collection.  Any  reform  of  the  tax,  therefore,  must  begin 
with  a  simplification  and  unification  of  the  rates  and  a  re- 
organization of  the  system  of  collection. 

1  Cf.  infra,  pp.  156-157. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

COLLECTION  AND  ADMINISTRATION  OF  THE  LAND  TAX 
UNDER  THE  TSING  DYNASTY 

IN  order  to  understand  fully  the  nature  of  the  tax  under 
the  Tsing  dynasty,  an  account  of  the  machinery  by  which  it 
was  collected  and  administered  will  be  necessary.  In  China, 
as  in  almost  all  countries,  the  administration  of  public  affairs 
is  entrusted  to  three  classes  of  governing  bodies,  namely, 
the  central,  the  provincial  and  the  local  governments.  In  the 
collection  and  administration  of  the  land  tax;,  and  of  all  the 
other  revenues,  the  same  division  of  the  responsibility  was 
followed.  At  the  head  of  the  system  was  the  Board  of  Reve- 
nues or  Hu  Pu  (the  name  was  changed  to  Tu^Tsi  Pu  in 
1906),  which  supervised  and  controlled  the  provincial  au- 
thorities. Under  the  provincial  authorities  there  were  local 
bodies.  These  general  statements  should  be  kept  in  mind  in 
connection  with  the  detailed  discussion  of  the  organization 
and  characteristics  of  these  three  classes  of  administrative 
bodies.  A  clear  account  of  these  will  help  one  to  understand 
not  only  the  particular  tax  with  which  we  are  concerned  in 
this  monograph,  but  also  the  general  features  of  the  revenue 
system  of  the  Tsing  dynasty. 

At  the  head  of  the  administration  was  the  Board  of  Reve- 
nues, which  was  one  of  the  original  six  boards  of  admin- 
istration of  the  Tsing  dynasty.1  The  board  was  entrusted 


six  Boards  are  the  Board  of  Civil  Office  (Li  Pu),  the  Board 
of  Ceremonies  (Lei  Pu),  the  Board  of  War  (Ping  Pu),  the  Board  of 
Public  Works  (Kung  Pu)  and  the  Board  of  Revenues  (Hu  Pu). 
108  [376 


377]  COLLECTION  AND  ADMINISTRATION  109 

with  a  multiplicity  of  duties,  some  of  which  were  financial  in 
character  and  others  not.  The  important  duties  of  the 
board,  however,  were  the  supervision  and  control  of  the 
revenues,  and  of  the  expenditures  of  the  empire.  More  spe- 
cifically, the  board  had  charge  of  the  apportionment  of  the 
levies  among  the  provinces  and  the  districts  within  the  prov- 
ince, the  levying  and  regulation  of  the  taxes  and  duties,  the 
measurement  of  the  lands  of  the  empire  and  control  of  the 
receipts  and  disbursements  of  the  granaries  and  treasuries. 

The  board  was  placed  under  the  joint  control  of  two 
presidents  or  shang-shu,  one  Chinese  and  one  Manchu. 
Under  the  presidents  there  were  four  vice-presidents,  shih- 
lang,  two  of  whom  must  be  Manchus.1  This  principle  of 
placing  Manchus  and  Chinese  in  joint  control  is  a  very 
characteristic  and  important  feature  of  the  Manchu  govern- 
ment. It  was  a  point  of  strength  as  well  as  a  point  of  weak- 
ness. It  resulted  from  the  realization  on  the  part  of  the 
founders  of  the  dynasty  that  their  people  were  ignorant  of 
the  conditions  of  China,  and  therefore  could  not  handle 
efficiently  the  administration  of  this  vast  Empire.  Instead 
of  placing  their  own  people  in  all  the  important  positions  of 
the  government  the  Manchus  utilized  the  experience  and 
superior  administrative  ability  of  the  Chinese.  The  system 
of  joint  control,  however,  had  obvious  defects.  Giving  two 
men  equal  authority  resulted  naturally  in  friction  and  con- 
flict of  views  between  the  two  heads.  Efficiency  of  admin- 
istration was  reduced  greatly  by  this  check-and-balance  sys- 
tem. This  feature  of  the  Manchu  government  had  much  to 
do  with  the  confusion  of  its  administration. 

Below  the  presidents  there  were  fourteen  departments, 

each  of  which  bore  the  name  of  the  province  over  which  its 

jurisdiction  lay.     Some  of   the  less  important  provinces 

were  placed  under  the  control  of  the  department  of  one 

*This  restriction  was  removed  in  1906. 


IIO  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [378 

of  the  neighboring  provinces.  Of  the  fourteen  departments 
five  had  charge  of  two  provinces.  The>  division *  was 
territorial,  another  characteristic  feature  of  the  organiza- 
tion and  administration  of  the  Manchu  government.  In 
each  of  the  departments  there  were  from  two  to  three  direc- 
tors, lung-chung.  When  there  were  two  directors,  one  of 
them  was  a  Manchu;  and  when  there  were  three,  two  of 
them  were  Manchus.  Under  the  directors  there  were  usu- 
ally from  three  to  six  subdirectors,  yan-wai~lang,  and  two 
or  three  assistants,  jo-zse.  The  same  principle  of  joint 
control  was  applied  here  as  in  the  case  of  the  higher  offi- 
cials. Each  of  these  departments  supervised  and  controlled 
the  finances  of  the  province  whose  name  it  bore.  In  addi- 
tion to  its  duty  of  supervision  and  control  of  the  provincial 
finances  each  department  usually  had  charge  of  some  work 
which  lay  entirely  outside  of  its  main  function.  For  in- 
stance, to  the  department  of  Kwangtung  was  assigned  the 
work  of  registration  and  succession  of  the  Bannermen ;  the 
department  of  Kweichow  had  charge  of  the  collection  of  the 
native  customs,  and  the  department  of  Shensi  was  respon- 
sible for  the  distribution  of  salaries  and  allowances  of  the 
Chinese  officials  in  Peking  (in  distinction  from  the  Manchu 
or  Mongolian  officials)  and  the  expenses  of  the  various 
yamen  in  the  Capital.2 

Besides  the  departments  there  were  a  number  of  bureaus 
under  the  board.  Chief  among  them  were  the  Bureau  of 
Currency,  which  had  charge  of  the  coinage  of  the  country, 
and  the  Bureau  of  Grain  Tribute,  which  was  placed  under 
the  control  of  two  of  the  vice-presidents  of  the  board.  In 
this  bureau  there  were  also  two  examiners  of  grains  whose 

1  For  the  organization  of  the  Board  of  -Revenues  see  Ta  Tsing  Hivei 
Tien,  bk.  viii,  passim, 

9  See  Hwei  Tien,  vol.  viii,  p.  24. 


COLLECTION  AND  ADMIN ISTRA  TJON 

duty  was  to  examine  the  grains  as  they  came  into  the  gran- 
aries in  Peking  and  Tungchow.  In  each  of  the  fifteen  gran- 
aries in  these  two  cities  there  was  also  a  superintendent 
under  the  control  of  the  Bureau  of  Grain  Tribute. 

Such,  then,  was  the  organization  of  the  Board  of  Reve- 
nue. In  practice  it  proved  itself  far  from  efficient.  The 
structure  was  built  on  the  theory  of  check-and-balance  be- 
tween the  Manchus  and  the  Chinese.  Each  of  the  depart- 
ments was  practically  a  unit  in  itself.  There  was  hardly 
any  coordination  and  unity  among  them.  This  independ- 
ence of  the  departments  accounted,  to  a  large  extent,  for  the 
great  diversity  and  confusion  of  the  taxes  in  the  different 
provinces,  and  for  the  indifference  of  one  province  toward 
another. 

The  supervision  and  control  by  the  central  government 
over  provincial  finances  was  in  no  sense  thorough  and  effi- 
cient. On  the  contrary,  it  was  merely  nominal  and  super- 
ficial. As  long  as  the  provincial  authorities  remitted  regu- 
larly the  quota  of  revenue  to  the  central  government  there 
was  no  interference.  It  has  been  said  that  in  practice  the 
provinces  of  China  occupied  an  almost  autonomous  posi- 
tion.1 Indeed,  a  large  degree  of  provincial  independence 
was,  however,  a  natural  consequence  of  the  physical  condi- 
tions of  the  country.  The  vast  extent  of  the  territory  and 
the  lack  of  adequate  means  of  communication  made  it  almost 
impossible  to  exercise  any  effective  supervision  and  control. 

The  administrative  organization  of  the  provinces  was 
uniform  throughout  the  empire.  At  the  head  of  one  or 
more  provinces  was  the  governor-general  (tsung-tu),  ap- 
pointed, as  were  all  other  officers  of  the  country,  by  the 
central  government.  He  has  been  called  by  the  Europeans 
the  viceroy.  That  term,  however,  is  misleading,  inasmuch 

1  Morse,  H.  B.,  op.  cit.,  pp.  45-46. 


H2  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [380 

as  he  ruled  not  over  a  kingdom  or  a  country  but  over  a 
territorial  division  of  a  state.  He  had  control  of  all  affairs, 
civil  as  well  as  military.  "  In  some  cases  he  is  the  actual 
governor,  though  with  the  power  and  rank  of  governor- 
general,  of  one  province  only;  in  others  he  has  jurisdiction 
over  two  or  three  provinces,  each  of  which  has  its  own  gov- 
ernor ;  and  still  other  provinces,  each  with  its  governor,  are 
subordinated  to  no  governor-general."  1  For  the  eighteen 
provinces  there  were  eight  governor-generals. 

Next  to  the  governor-general  in  rank  was  the  governor 
(sun-fu).  His  authority  and  power  varied.  If  there  was 
no  governor-general  in  his  province,  he  was  practically  the 
supreme  head  of  the  province.  In  case  there  was  a  gover- 
nor-general residing  in  the  same  proincial  capital,  his  power 
was  naturally  overshadowed  by  that  of  the  governor-general 
and  was  in  that  case  often  limited  to  the  more  special  super- 
vision of  the  civil  government,  as  distinguished  from  the 
revenue,  or  other  branches  of  administration. 

The  administration  of  the  provincial  government  was 
divided  into  six  departments,  viz.,  Civil,  Judicial,  Educa- 
tional, the  Gabelle,  the  Commissariat  and  the  Excise. 
Of  the  six  departments,  we  are  here  interested  mainly 
in  the  civil  and  the  commissariat.  The  civil  department 
was  under  the  control  of  the  civil  commissioner  (pu-ching- 
sze)  who  had  charge  of  the  civil  service  as  well  as  the 
financial  administration  of  the  province,  and  on  account  of 
the  predominance  of  the  latter  duties  he  has  been  called 
the  provincial  treasurer.  He  had  charge  of  the  collection 
and  disbursement  of  the  provincial  revenues.  But  his 
most  important  duties  are  the  supervision  of  the  collection 
of  the  land  tax,  for  the  collection  of  the  other  important 
revenues  were  placed  under  separate  officers.  The  collec- 

1  Morse,  op.  cit.,  p.  49,  cf.  also  Hwei  Tien,  vol.  viii,  p.  25. 


3gi ]  COLLECTION  AND  ADMINISTRATION  113 

tion  of  the  gabelle  was  under  the  control  of  the  salt  com- 
missioner (yen-yun  sze  or  yen-yun-tao)  and  the  collection 
of  the  native  customs  under  customs  commissioner  (kwan- 
tao).  The  grain  tribute,  which,  as  has  already  been  pointed 
out,  is  part  of  the  land  tax,  was  also  placed  under  the  charge 
of  a  separate  official  called  the  grain  commissioner  (liang- 
tao).  But  in  spite  of  these  limitations  the  provincial  treas- 
urer occupied  an  important  position  in  the  financial  system 
of  the  country.  He  was  responsible,  in  the  first  place, 
to  the  department  of  the  Board  of  Revenue,  which  de- 
partment bore  the  name  of  his  province,  for  the  collection 
and  remittance  of  the  quota  of  revenue  assigned  to  his  prov- 
ince. In  the  second  place,  he  was  held  liable  by  the  governor 
for  the  expenditure  of  the  provincial  government.  In  the 
third  place,  he  regulated  and  supervised  the  actual  collection 
of  the  tax  by  the  district  magistrates,  of  whom  more  will  be 
said  presently. 

The  grain  commissioner  or  commissariat  (lian-chu  tao\ 
was  usually  equal  in  rank  to  the  provincial  treasurer.  Of 
the  eighteen  provinces  there  were  twelve  grain  commission- 
ers,1 the  provincial  treasurers  attending  to  this  duty  in  the 
other  six.  These  commissioners  had  charge  of  the  collection 
of  the  grain  tribute  collected  whether  in  kind  or  commuted. 
For  the  eight  provinces  which  paid  the  tribute  in  kind  before 
the  Taiping  Rebellion  there  was  also  a  grain  governor  who 
was  equal  in  rank  to  the  governor-general.  He  supervised 
the  transportation  and  disposal  of  the  grains  collected  in  the 
eight  provinces  which  are  all  adjacent  to  the  Yangtze  River. 
The  actual  collection  of  grain  from  the  farmers  was  in  the 
hands  of  the  prefects  and  district  magistrates. 

There  were  sixteen  granaries,  fourteen  of  which  were  in 
Peking  where  the  grains  for  the  three  regiments  of  the 

1  Hwei  Tien,  vol.  v,  p.  n. 


U4  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [382 

Banner  garrisons  were  stored,  and  a  special  one  where  the 
grain  for  the  consumption  of  the  imperial  household  was 
kept,  two  in  the  city  of  Tangchow  where  the  grains  for  the 
Manchu  princes,  the  officials  and  the  other  Bannermen  were 
stored. 

For  administrative  purposes  the  provinces  were  divided 
into  fu,  which  are  commonly  called  by  the  Westerners  pre- 
fects, and  hsien,  districts.1  There  were  two  other  divisions, 
known  as  ting  and  chow,  which  may,  however,  be  consid- 
ered special  kinds  of  fu  and  possessed  no  special  signifi- 
cance from  an  administrative  point  of  view.  A  fu  was  a 
large  division  of  a  province  placed  under  the  control  of  a 
civil  officer  called  chih-fu  or  prefect  immediately  sub- 
ordinate to  the  head  of  the  provincial  government.  The 
Chinese  prefect  must  not  be  confused  with  the  French  de- 
partement,  which  is  an  important  administrative  unit  of  the 
French  government.  The  fu  was  more  like  the  arron- 
dissement  than  the  departement,  in  that  the  fu,  as  the 
arrondissement  had  no  important  administrative  duties.  As 
an  administrative  unit  the  Chinese  fu  was  much  inferior  in 
importance  to  the  district  or  hsien.  There  were  from  seven  z 
to  fourteen  s  fu  in  one  province  and  a  total  of  183  fu  in  the 
eighteen  provinces. 

Similar  to  fu  were  the  ting  and  the  chow.  A  ting  was 
usually  smaller  than  a  fu  and  it  was  either  governed  like 
the  fu  by  an  officer  immediately  under  the  heads  of  the  pro- 
vincial government  or  formed  part  of  a  fu.  In  the  former 
case  it  was  called  a  chihli  ting  or  independent  ting,  and  in 
the  latter  case  it  was  simply  called  a  ting.  A  chow  was  a 
division  very  similar  to  a  ting  either  independent  of  the  fu 

1  For  official  definitions   and  classifications  of  the  various  political 
units  cf.  Hwei  Tien,  vol.  viii,  pp.  23-31. 
5  In  Shensi. 
gln  Yunnan. 


383  ]  COLLECTION  AND  ADMIN ISTRA  TION  1 1 5 

or  forming  part  of  it.  The  difference  between  the  two  lay 
in  the  fact  that  the  government  of  the  ting  resembled  the  fu 
more  than  that  of  a  chow.1 

In  function  the  fu  was  similar  to  the  French  arrondisse- 
ment  rather  than  the  depwrtement.  The  (arrondissement  has 
the  function  of  allotting  among  the  communes  their  quota 
of  the  taxes  assigned  to  the  arrondissement  by  the  council 
of  the  department.  The  fu  had  not  even  that  duty.  The 
prefect  dealt  more  with  the  external  relations  of  his  fu  than 
internal  administration  and  was  more  a  channel  of  commu- 
nication than  an  executive  officer.  Similar  to  the  fu,  the 
ting  or  the  chow  was  under  the  control  of  a  separate  officer, 
who  was  either  under  the  direction  of  the  fu,  in  case  of  the 
ordinary  ting,  or  reported  directly  to  the  heads  of  the 
provincial  authority. 

The  most  important  unit  of  local  government  in  China 
was  the  hsien,  commonly  known  as  the  district.  A  hsien 
might  be  a  division  of  a  fu,  a  chow  or  a  ting.  The  number 
of  hsien  varied  from  province  to  province,  there  being  as 
few  as  34  in  Kweichow  and  as  many  as  124  in  Chihli. 
There  were  1,443  hsiens  in  the  eighteen  provinces  and  27  in 
Manchuria,  making  a  total  of  i  ,470.  In  size  the  hsien  was 
like  the  French  department  or  the  English  administrative 
counties,  although  the  variation  of  the  hsien  was  not  as 
great  as  in  the  case  of  these  units.  In  function  the  hsien 
bore  more  resemblances  to  the  French  commune  or  the  Eng- 
lish borough  than  to  the  department  or  the  county. 

It  is  a  familiar  fact  in  the  history  of  political  institutions 
that  government  systems  are,  as  a  rule,  more  stable  at  the 
bottom  than  at  the  top.  The  arrangements  of  the  provinces 
and  prefectures  in  China  have  undergone  many  changes 
under  the  different  dynasties.  But  the  hsien  has  remained 

1For  a  clear  differentiation  of  the  various  units  of  government  in 
China  see  Chinese  Repository,  vol.  iv,  pp.  54-56. 


n6  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [384 

practically  unaltered  in  the  long  history  of  the  country. 
As  the  commune  is  to-day  the  oldest  unit  of  local  govern- 
ment in  France,  so  is  the  hsien  in  China.  The  hsien  has  a 
very  ancient  origin.  Some  writers  believe  it  to  be  at  least 
2000  years  old.1 

The  hsien  was,  and  still  is,  the  political,  judicial,  as  well 
as  the  fiscal,  unit  of  the  government.  The  chih-hsien,  or 
the  district  magistrate,  as  he  was  usually  called,  had  a 
multiplicity  of  duties.  He  was  the  local  representative  of 
the  provincial  as  well  as  of  the  imperial  government,  and  in 
that  capacity  he  was  responsible  for  the  maintenance  of 
peace  and  order  and  the  administration  of  justice  of  the 
territory  within  his  jurisdiction.  He  was  the  head  of  the 
civil  administration  of  his  district  and  sat  as  judge  of  the 
district  court.  He  had  charge  of  the  collection  of  the 
land  tax  as  well  as  the  grain  tribute.  For  the  former 
he  was  responsible  to  the  provincial  treasurer  and  for  the 
latter  to  the  grain  commissioner.  In  financial  matters  he 
may  be  compared  to  the  Tresoriers-payers-generaux  of 
the  French  department.  He  kept  a  complete  record  of 
lands  within  his  jurisdiction  and  was  the  custodian  of  the 
taxes,  and  he  was  responsible  to  the  provincial  treasurer 
for  the  collection  of  the  amount  of  taxes  assigned  to  his 
district  and  might  be  cashiered  for  failure  to  collect  the  re- 
quired amount.  He  was  also  the  register  of  the  deeds  of 
his  district. 

The  hsien  was  usually  subdivided  into  wards,  each  of 
which  was  placed  under  the  control  of  an  officer  called  the 
siun-kien,  who  formed  the  last  in  the  hierarchy  of  offi- 
cials in  China.  He  assisted  the1  district  magistrate  in  the 
discharge  of  his  duties.  Besides  the  regular  force  of  sub- 
ordinates attached  to  the  district  magistrate  there  was  a  semi- 

1  Parker,  E.  H.,  China,  her  Diplomacy,  History  and  Commerce  (2d. 
ed.  1917),  P-  184. 


385  ]  COLLECTION  AND  ADMINISTRA  TION  1 1 7 

official  person  who  was  connected  with  the  collection  of  the 
land  tax  in  many  ways.  He  was  known  as  ti-pao,  or  elder. 
The  method  of  appointment  of  this  officer  varied  from 
place  to  place.  In  some  localities  he  was  elected  by  an 
assembly,  closely  resembling  a  "  town  meeting/'  and  in 
others  he  was  appointed  by  the  district  magistrate,  subject  to 
the  approval  of  the  community.1  A  large  village  or  a  town 
might  have  a  number  of  ti-pao,  while  two  or  three  small 
villages  might  have  only  one.  Besides  other  duties  he  was 
"  the  official  land  surveyor  of  his  village,"  and  had  the 
"duty  of  verifying  title  and  boundaries  on  every  transfer 
of  land."  He  was  also  "  responsible  for  the  prompt  pay- 
ment of  the  land  tax  and  the  grain  tribute."  2 

This,  then,  in  brief  is  the  hierarchy  of  officers  by  which 
the  land  tax  and  the  grain  tributes  were  collected  under  the 
Tsing  dynasty.3  In  theory  the  system  as  a  whole  is 
democratic.  There  were  no  ziminders  or  hereditary  tax- 
tax-collectors  in  'China  as  in  India.  Nor  had  the  pernicious 
system  of  assigning  revenues  from  cities  or  provinces  to  the 
members  of  the  royal  family  or  favorites,  as  in  Persia  or 
Syria,  ever  been  practiced  in  China.  But  the  system  was 
far  from  being  efficient.  Some  of  the  more  important  de- 
fects of  the  system  have  already  been  pointed  out  in  the 
analysis  of  the  system.  There  are,  however,  several  other 
points  that  should  be  noted. 

In  the  first  place,  it  should  be  observed  that  all  the  offi- 

1  Smith,  Village  Life  in  China,  pp.  227-9. 

2  Williams,  The  Middle  Kingdom,  vol.  i,  pp.  500-551. 

*  The  short  account  here  given  of  the  organization  of  the  government 
is  true,  of  course,  only  before  1000.  Since  then  there  have  been  many 
changes  and  "  reforms ",  but  the  essential  feature  and  the  framework 
of  the  government  with  the  exception  of  the  organization  of  the  Board 
of  Revenue  which  has  recently  been  thoroughly  reorganized  remain 
the  same.  Social  and  political  institutions  change  very  slowly. 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [386 

cials  from  the  presidents  of  the  board  of  revenues  at  the 
top  to  the  district  magistrate  at  the  bottom  were  appointed 
by  the  emperor.1  It  is  true  that  for  the  appointment  of 
the  lower  officers  the  provincial  governor  might  and  did 
recommend  candidates,  but  the  final  authority  rested  with 
the  emperor.  This  attempt  on  the  part  of  the  central  gov- 
ernment to  place  the  vast  machinery  under  its  control  re- 
sulted in  a  loss  of  efficiency  and  effectiveness  of  adminis- 
tration. 

Secondly,  it  should  be  noted  that  all  the  appointments  were 
made  for  a  term  of  three  years.  Although  this  restriction 
was  not  closely  adhered  to  in  the  appointment  of  the  high 
provincial  officials,  it  was  observed  faithfully  in  the  appoint- 
ment of  the  lower  officials.  An  official  might  be  reappointed 
for  a  second  term,  but  that  was  not  often  done.  Almost 
invariably  an  official  lower  in  rank  after  serving  three  years 
in  one  post  was  transferred  to  another  post,  often  in  another 
province  where  the  conditions  were  usually  quite  different 
from  the  province  where  he  last  served.  This  constant 
shifting  of  an  official  from  one  place  to  another  and  the  un- 
certainty of  tenure  of  the  office  were  responsible  to  a  large 
degree  for  the  inefficiency  and  corruption  of  the  adminis- 
tration. 

A  third  difficulty  of  the  system  of  administration  lay 
in  the  rule  that  no  civil  officer  was  ever  appointed  to  the 
province  of  his  birth.  The  underlying  purpose  in  requir- 
ing that  no  civil  officer  should  serve  in  his  native  province 
was  to  prevent  any  undue  corruption  and  exactions  from  the 
people,  the  theory  being  that  a  stranger  was  less  likely  to 
commit  these  practices  than  one  who  was  familiar  with  the 
local  condition.  This  rule  was  followed  universally:  there 
was  no  exception.  When  one  remembers  the  diversity  of 

1  The  ti-pao  is  not  recognized  as  an  official  of  the  Imperial  government. 


387]  COLLECTION  AND  ADMINISTRATION 

local  conditions  and  the  variety  of  dialects  in  some  parts  of 
the  country  he  can  readily  see  the  difficulties  that  an  official 
would  have  to  encounter  in  his  work.  This  fact,  coupled 
with  the  three-year  rule,  was  responsible  for  a  considerable 
share  of  the  inefficiency  and  chaos  of  the  administrative 
system  of  the  Tsing  dynasty. 

The  fourth  and  perhaps  the  most  serious  difficulty  of  the 
system  of  administration  in  the  Tsing  dynasty  is  to  be 
found  in  the  scanty  provision  made  for  maintenance  of  the 
officials.  The  inadequacy  of  the  salaries  and  allowances 
of  the  officials,  coupled  with  the  lack  of  control  and  super- 
vision, goes  a  long  way  in  accounting  for  the  irregularities 
in  the  collection  of  the  taxes.1 

1  Cf.  supra,  p.  104. 


CHAPTER  IX 
ANALYSIS  OF  THE  DEFECTS  OF  THE  SYSTEM 

HAVING  analyzed  the  nature  of  the  land  tax,  the  next 
step  is  to  discuss  some  of  the  difficulties  of  the  system, 
several  of  which  have  already  been  alluded  to.1  In  this 
chapter  a  more  systematic  and  detailed  analysis  of  the 
situation  will  be  presented  in  the  hope  that  it  may  make 
some  contribution  toward  solving  this  pressing  problem 
now  before  the  Chinese  government. 

In  the  first  place  the  system  of  rates  is  faulty.  In  the 
discussion  of  the  nature  of  the  tax  it  was  seen  that  the  rate 
of  the  tax  was,  in  theory,  based  on  the  "  fertility  "  of  the 
soil.2  Land  was  divided  into  three  classes,  each  of  which 
was  subdivided  into  three  grades  according  to  fertility.  Ac- 
cording to  modern  theories  such  a  basis  of  taxation  is  of 
course  not  the  most  equitable  one.  However,  in  view  of  the 
fairly  uniform  economic  conditions  of  the  country,  with  its 
system  of  small  holdings  and  intensive  cultivation,  the  basis 
of  the  tax  would  have  been  tolerably  satisfactory,  had  it  been 
carried  out  properly  But  in  practice  instead  of  having  nine 
rates  of  tax>  in  accordance  with  the  nominal  plan1,  there  is  a 
multiplicity  of  rates.  For  each  province,  as  has  been  shown, 
the  central  government  set  only  a  maximum  and  a  mini- 
mum rate,  leaving  the  determination  of  the  actual  rates  to 
be  applied  to  the  different  kinds  of  land  in  the  province  in 
the  hands  of  the  provincial  authorities.  But  the  provincial 

1  Cf.  supra,  pp.  117-119. 

2  Cf.  supra,  p.  90. 

120  [388 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  DEFECTS  OF  THE  SYSTEM      121 

authorities  never  adopt  any  system  of  rates  to  be  followed 
by  the  district  magistrates,  who  are  the  responsible  tax 
collectors.  Nor  has  the  district  any  definite  system  of 
rates.  The  magistrate  merely  collects  the  taxes  that  have 
been  long  established  by  his  predecessors.  Consequently 
there  are  tens  and  sometimes  hundreds  of  rates  in  one 
district1 

This  situation  is  further  complicated  by  the  fact  that  in  the 
great  majority  of  cases  the  tax  assessed  on  each  piece  of 
land  consists  of  two  parts,  one  payable  in  money  and  the 
other  in  produce.  The  produce  may  consist  in  turn  of  one, 
two  or  three  kinds.  There  is  no  definite  proportion  between 
the  two  payments.  One  piece  of  land  may  be  assessed  at 
a  high  rate  in  money  and  a  low  rate  in  produce  and  another 
vice  versa. 

With  the  multiplicity  of  rates  there  naturally  arises  in- 
equality. The  rate  of  the  tax  is  in  general  heavy  in  the 
southern  and  eastern  provinces  and  light  in  the  northern 
and  western  provinces.  Inequality  exists,  however,  not  only 
among  provinces  but  also  among  the  districts  in  the  same 
province.  The  tax  was  apportioned,  as  has  been  pointed 
out,  among  the  provinces  which  in  turn  apportioned  it  among 
their  districts.  The  apportionment  is  based,  however,  on 
the  antiquated  returns  of  the  eighteenth  century.  Certain 
districts  in  Chekiang  and  Kiangsu,  for  example,  have  been 
taxed  at  rates  probably  several  times  heavier  than  the  rest 
of  the  country.  * 

The  second  difficulty  in  the  tax  situation  is  the  great 
variety  of  units  of  measurement.  It  is  commonly  supposed 
that  China  has  never  adopted  any  uniform  system  of 

1  Finances  of  the  Republic,  vol.  i,  p.  91. 

'Hsu  Ung-Yuen,  "The  Reform  of  the  Land  Tax  in  China."  The 
Chinese  Social  and  Political  Science  Review,  April,  1916,  p.  109. 


122  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [390 

measurement.  This,  however,  is  not  true.  From  the  time 
of  the  Chow  dynasty  China  has  had  official  standards. 
In  the  discussion  of  the  tax  under  the  Tsing  dynasty  we 
have  mentioned  that  among  other  reforms  introduced  by  the 
founders  of  the  dynasty  efforts  were  made  to  enforce  a 
uniform  system  of  measurement.1  But  owing  to  the  ex- 
tensiveness  of  the  country,  the  diversity  of  local  conditions 
and,  above  all,  the  policy  of  Icdssez  faire  of  the  central  gov- 
ernment these  units  of  measurement  have  never  been  strictly 
enforced.  The  trader  as  well  as  the  tax-collector  sees  in 
the  diversity  of  units  of  measurement  an  opening  for  extra 
profit  and  illegal  charge.  Occasionally  the  government  tries 
to  interfere  with  the  practices  of  irregularity  and  enforce 

1  There  are  three  fundamental  units,  namely,  the  unit  of  length,  the 
unit  of  weight  and  the  unit  of  capacity.  (Of  the  three  units,  the  unit 
of  length  is  the  basic  one,  from  which  the  other  two  are  derived.  The 
unit  of  length  from  the  time  of  Huang-Ti  has  been  based  on  the  length 
of  the  small  glutinous  millet.  The  length  of  ten  average  grains  of  the 
small  glutinous  millet  placed  side  by  side  was  adopted  as  the  length 
of  one  foot.  The  foot  adopted  by  the  Tsing  dynasty  is,  however, 
a  little  longer  than  the  ancient  foot.  The  ancient  foot  was  based  on 
the  length  of  these  grains  laid  cross-wise,  or  by  their  narrower 
diameter,  while  the  modern  foot  is  based  on  the  length  of  the  grains 
placed  length-wise  or  by  their  longer  diameter.  (Hwei  Tien,  bk.  xi, 
ff.  36-37.  For  an  account  in  English  cf.  'Ross,  op.  cit.,  pp.  668-671). 
Hence  one  ancient  foot  is  equivalent  to  only  .81  of  the  modern  foot. 
(Cf.  ibid.)  The  foot  is  divided  into  ten  inches  and  other  decimal 
subdivisions.  The  unit  of  weight  is  the  kin,  commonly  known  as  the 
catty  (derived  from  the  Malayan  word  katti  meaning  pound),  and 
is  divided  into  sixteen  Hang  or  taels.  One  cubic  inch  of  gold,  accord- 
ing to  the  law,  weighs  16.8  Hang ;  of  silver  g  Hang ;  of  red  copper 
7.5  liang.  The  unit  of  capacity  is  the  sheng,  which  is  equal,  according 
to  law,  to  31.6  cubic  inches.  Ten  sheng  equal  one  tao,  which  is 
therefore  equivalent  to  316  cubic  inches.  (For  the  various  units  of 
measurements  and  their  equivalent  in  English  units  cf.  Appendix  I, 
infra,  p.  176.)  The  mow  used  during  the  three  dynasties  is  equal 
to  100  square  pu,  one  pu  being  equal  to  five  feet.  The  modern  mow 
which  has  come  from  Han  dynasty  is  equal  to  240  square  pu  or  2.4 
larger  than  the  ancient  mow. 


39 1  ]    ANALYSIS  OF  THE  DEFECTS  OF  THE  SYSTEM 

the  standard  units,  but  owing  to  the  reasons  indicated 
above,  such  interference  has  never  gone  beyond  the  issuance 
of  an  imperial  decree  or  proclamation  which  was  promptly 
disregarded. 

The  differences  in  the  measures  actually  used  are  often, 
material.  For  example  "  in  the  trade  area  of  Shanghai 
there  is  a  standard  for  the  use  of  the  Chinese  in  their 
foreign  dealings  by  which  the  catty  is  20.4  ounces,  while 
the  regular  gold  catty  is  18.6  ounces;  the  Soochow  gold 
catty  is  19.7  ounces,  that  for  rice  paid  as  imperial  tribute 
20.6  ounces;  while  that  for  the  sale  of  oil  is  23.2  ounces 
and  for  sugar  is  27.25  ounces.  At  Hangchow  there  are 
seven  different  standards,  ranging  from  16  to  24  ounces, 
all  equally  recognized  in  their  respective  trades;  and 
throughout  the  Empire  the  catties  are  known  to  range 
from  12  to  42.5  ounces." 1  Theoretically  one  hundred 
catties  are  equal  to  one  picul,  in  practice  the  picul  varies 
all  way  from  100  to  180  catties.  "Of  rice  the  picul  at 
Shanghai  is  100  catties,  at  Amoy  140  catties,  and  at 
Soochow  1 80  catties;  for  tribute  rice  the  stipulated  picul  isi 
1 20  catties,  but  at  Nanking  it  is  140  catties."  * 

In  the  discussion  of  the  rates  of  the  tax  it  was  mentioned 
that  the  grain-tribute  was  assessed  by  measures  of  capacity. 
But  in  practice  it  is  "  generally  collected  by  weight  at  a  rate 
of  conversion  fixed  by  the  collectors.  In  the  standard  tad 
(which  we  may  call  peck)  for  tribute  the  tao  contains  629 
cubic  inches  (Chinese)  but  in  different  parts  of  the  Empire 
there  is  a  variation  in  the  contents  of  this  measure  ranging 
from  176  to  1800  cubic  inches,." 

The  legal  unit  for  measuring  land  is  the  mow  which  is 
equal  to  240  square  pu  or  6000  square  feet  (Chinese).  But 
the  foot  varies  in  different  parts  of  the  country.  In  Canton, 

1  Morse,  op.  tit.,  p.  173. 

2  Ibid. 


I24  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [392 

for  example,  the  city  is  divided  into  two  sections  by  a  line 
running  through  the  middle  of  the  city.  On  the  east  of  the 
line  land  is  measured  by  a  foot  of  14.8  inches,  while  on  west 
of  the  line  by  foot  of  14.7  inches.  In  Shanghai  there  are 
at  least  four  different  measures  of  the  foot  in  use.  The 
official  land  foot  is  12.6  inches,  the  foot  used  for  transfer 
of  land  is  13.2  inches,  while  the  tailor's  foot  is  13.85  inches 
and  the  carpenter's  foot  n.i  inches.1  With  the  diversity 
in  the  length  of  the  foot  the  mow  varies.  The  standard 
mow  is  equal  to  6000  square  feet  (which  is  equivalent  to 
7260  square  feet,  English).  But  in  practice  it  varies  all  the 
way  from  3840  to  9964  square  feet.2  Besides  the  mow, 
there  are  other  units  of  measurement  used  in  different  parts 
of  the  country.  In  Manchuria,  for  example,  the  unit  most 
commonly  used  is  the  tien  which  is  also  of  variable  extent. 
In  some  places  it  is  six  mow,  while  in  others  ten.3  These 
instances  are  sufficient  to  indicate  the  chaotic  complexity 
of  the  situation. 

Besides  the  multiplicity  of  rates  and  diversity  of  units  of 
measurement,  the  tax  system  is  further  complicated  by  the 
chaotic  condition  of  the  currency  in  which  the  tax  is  col- 
lected. The  tax,  as  has  already  seen,  was  assessed  partly 
in  money  and  partly  in  produce.  The  money  part  was 
given  in  terms  of  silver.  But  with  one  slight  exception 
silver  was  not  coined  in  China  until  late  in  the  nineteenth 
century.*  Whenever  it  was  used  as  a  medium  of  exchange 

1  Morse,  op.  £it.,  p.  174. 

'Williams,  E.  T.,  "Taxation  of  China,"  Quarterly  Journal  of 
Economics,  May,  1912. 

8 "  Conditions  of  the  Rural  Population  in  China,"  //.  Asiatic  Assn., 
vol.  xxiii,  p.  79. 

4  The  only  time,  until  1889,  that  China  ever  minted  silver  coins  was  in 
the  reign  of  Hioa-tsung,  second  emperor  of  the  Southern  Sung  dynasty 
(about  A.  D.  1183).  In  this  coinage  the  ratio  between  one  tael  of  silver 
and  copper  cash  was  fixed  at  i  to  2000. 


3931    ANALYSIS  OF  THE  DEFECTS  OF  THE  SYSTEM     125 

it  was  used  by  weight,  the  common  unit  being  the  liang,  or 
tael,  as  it  is  called  by  foreigners.  A  tael  is  nothing  but  a 
tael  weight  of  silver  of  certain  fineness.  The  currency 
coined  by  the  government  and  used  by  the  people  in  their 
transactions  was  the  copper  cash,  which  has  been  in  use  for 
twenty-five  centuries.  The  ratio  between  the  silver  and 
the  copper  was  originally  fixed  at  i  to  1000.  The  copper 
coin  was  made  to  weigh  one-tenth  of  a  tael,  making  it  in 
value  one-thousandth  of  a  tael  of  silver. 

As  copper  was  the  principal  currency  of  the  people  the 
tax  was  usually  collected  in  copper  cash  at  a  rate  of  con- 
version which  was  almost  invariably  higher  than  the  market 
rate.  After  the  reign  of  Yung-chen  (1723-1736),  when 
the  cash  began  to  degenerate  both  in  size  and  weight,  the 
rate  of  conversion  was  also  increased  until  toward  the 
middle  of  the  last  century,  when  the  copper  cash  had  so 
depreciated  in  terms  of  silver  that  the  collectors  again  de- 
manded payment  in  silver.  But  the  tax  was  not  collected 
in  the  original  silver  rate  given  in  the  tax  bill.  That  would 
make  impossible  the  increases,  either  legal  or  illegal,  that 
had  taken  place  under  cover  of  rate  of  conversion.  There- 
fore the  rate  was  converted  back  from  cash  into  silver  at 
the  prevailing  market  rate  plus,  of  course,  another  surplus 
to  cover  the  expenses  of  collection  and  other  charges.  Thus, 
at  the  end  of  the  Tsing  dynasty  in  the  tax  bill  one  finds  the 
rate  given  in  silver  and  converted  into  cash  at  from  2000 
to  3000  cash  to  the  tael  and  then  converted  back  into  silver 
at  the  prevailing  market  rate  of  from  800  to  1000  cash  to 
the  tael.  The  effect  is  that  the  tax  was  increased  sometimes 
to  several  times  the  original  statutory  amount. 

The  situation  was  further  aggravated  by  the  lack  of  a 
uniform  unit  of  currency.  The  official  unit  at  which  all 
taxes  were  payable  was  the  Kuping  tael,  which  is  575.8 
grains  of  silver  100  per  cent  fine.  But  each  province,  indeed 


I26  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [394 

each  commercial  center,  has  its  own  standards  of  the  tael 
weight  and  of  fineness.  In  the  city  of  Peking  for  example, 
there  are  besides  the  Kuping  tael,  three  other  standards  of 
tael  weight  each  of  which  has  two  standards  of  silver,  with 
the  result  that  there  are  at  Peking  seven  taels  all  current. 

The  tael  itself,  moreover,  is  only  an  imaginary  medium  of 
exchange.  It  was  never  coined.  The  ordinary  daily  transac- 
tions of  the  people  are  carried  on  in  the  dollar  and  subsidary 
coins.  Of  the  dollar  there  are  many  varieties,  both  foreign 
and  Chinese.  Besides  the  dollar  there  are  other  subsidiary 
silver  coins  and  copper  cents.  But  owing  to  the  large  and 
unregulated  issue  of  these  coins  they  have  not  been  able  to 
maintain  their  parity  with  the  dollar.  The  rates  of  ex- 
change between  these  subsidiary  coins  and  the  dollar  vary 
from  place  to  place  and  from  day  to  day.  In  most  cases 
the  tax  is  collected  in  these  coins,  which  necessitates  a  third 
process  of  conversion  from  the  tael  to  the  coin  in  which 
the  tax-payer  wishes  to  pay  his  tax.  It  is  not  our  purpose 
here  to  enter  into  any  detailed  discussion  of  the  currency 
problem  in  China.1  But  this  is  sufficient  to  show  the  com- 
plexity and  confusion  of  the  situation,  and  the  vexatiousness 
of  the  system. 

A  fourth  and  obvious  defect  of  the  system  is  the  lack  of 
a  proper  tax-roll.  One  of  the  most  fundamental  require- 
ments in  an  efficient  system  of  land  tax  is  the  existence  of 
a  tax-roll  which  is  based  upon  an  accurate  and  complete 
cadastral  survey  of  the  country  and  contains  all  the  neces- 
sary information  in  regard  to  the  assessment  of  land.  The 
necessity  of  having  such  a  record  was  realized  by  the  gov- 
ernments of  the  various  dynasties  as  well  as  by  the  Manchu 
government.  We  have  seen  that  at  the  beginning  of  the 

1  For  a  recent  study  on  the  currency  problem  in  China,  cf.  W.  P. 
Wei,  Currency  Problems  in  China. 


395]    ANALYSIS  OF  THE  DEFECTS  OF  THE  SYSTEM 

Tsing  dynasty  provisions  were  made  for  a  periodical  survey 
and  revision  of  the  tax-roll.  But  the  provisions  were  not 
carried  out  faithfully  and  whatever  records  existed  before 
the  Taiping  Rebellion  were  largely  destroyed  by  that  pro- 
longed war. 

The  collection  of  the  tax  during  the  Tsing  dynasty  and, 
for  that  matter  today,  was  based  on  a  very  inaccurate  and 
incomplete  record.  For  the  last  hundred  years  the  amount 
of  land  reported  as  taxable  is  about  9,000,000  mow  which 
is  a  ridiculously  small  figure  for  a  large  and  populous 
country  like  China.1  This  is  to  be  explained  by  at  least 
two  reasons.  In  the  first  place  there  is  a  large  amount  of 
corruption  on  the  part  of  the  tax  collectors  and  other  au- 
thorities through  whose  hands  the  returns  of  the  tax  flow. 
A  considerable  amount  of  the  receipts  of  the  tax  is  retained 
by  them  and  the  irregularity  is  covered  by  under-reporting 
the  amount  of  taxable  land  within  their  jurisdictions.  In 
the  second  place  there  is  a  large  amount  of  evasion.  Large 
tracts  of  land  escape  taxation  on  account  of  the  inaccuracy 
and  incompleteness  of  the  records.  One  of  the  most  com- 
mon forms  of  evasion  arises  from  the  fact  that  in  selling 
land  the  owners  often  agree  to  continue  to  pay  the  taxes  in 
return  for  a  larger  price  than  would  otherwise  be  paid. 
What  was  originally  a  land  tax  is  thus  converted  into  ai 
personal  obligation.  In  the  course  of  time  these  persons  or 
their  descendants  die  or  remove  from  the  district  and  the 
government  is  no  longer  able  to  enforce  the  collection  of 
the  tax.2 

Any  reform  of  the  land  tax  system  in  Chinia  must  there- 
fore begin  with  a  survey  of  the  land  and  a  completion  of 
an  accurate  tax  roll.  It  was  to  carry  out  this  work  that  the 

1  Cf.  infra,  p.  154. 

*C/.  Ung-Yu«i  Hsu,  op.  cit.,  pp.  103-104. 


I2g  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [396 

Bureau  of  Land  Measurement  was  established  by  the  gov- 
ernment in  1914,  but  unfortunately,  owing  to  financial  and 
other  difficulties,  the  work  of  the  Bureau  was  discontinued! 
shortly  after  its  establishment.1 

A  fifth  defect,  or  rather  group  of  defects,  lies  in  the  sys- 
tem of  administration,  some  of  which  have  already  been 
mentioned  in  the  discussion  of  the  nature  of  the  tax  and 
system  of  collection.2  It  remains  to  point  out  here  that  the 
chief  difficulties  in  the  system  are  the  inadequacy  of  the 
financial  support  given  to  the  officials  entrusted  with  the 
administration  and  the  collection  of  the  tax,  and  the  lack  of 
supervision  and  control  by  the  central  government.  The  tax, 
as  has  been  stated,  was  apportioned  among  the  provinces, 
and  provincial  authorities  then  re-apportioned  it  among  the 
districts.  Each  district  was  required  to  remit  to  the  pro- 
vincial authorities  a  certain  amount  which  was,  in  theory, 
the  minimum  but  in  practice  the  maximum  remitted.  The 
relation  between  the  provincial  authorities  and  the  central 
government  was  similar  to  that  between  the  former  and  the 
district  authorities.  The  amount  that  was  required  of  the 
province  by  the  central  government  was  also-  in  theory  the 
minimum  but  in  practice  the  maximum  remitted  to  Peking. 

The  situation  is  aggravated  by  the  fact  that  neither  the  pro- 
vincial nor  the  district  governments  are  properly  provided 
with  funds  for  the  carrying  on  of  the  work  entrusted  to 
them.  The  result  is  that  the  district  magistrate  tries  to  collect 
from  the  people  as  much  as  he  can,  and  remit  to  the  pro- 
vincial authorities  as  little  as  possible ;  the  provincial  author- 
ities, similarly,  try  to  obtain  from  the  magistrates  as  much 
and  remit  to  Peking  as  little  as  possible.  It  is  true  that  each 
of  the  parties  is  bound  by  traditions  and  customs  which 

1  Cf.  infra,  p.  164. 

2  Cf.  supra. 


397]    ANALYSIS  OF  THE  DEFECTS  OF  THE  SYSTEM 

have  created  in  the  course  of  time  a  status  of  equilibrium 
among  them.  But  the  practice  is  vicious  and  degrading. 

One  of  the  fundamental  problems  which  must  be  solved  in 
China  in  reforming  the  land-tax  system  is  therefore  the 
reorganization  of  the  machinery  of  collection.  The  ques- 
tion here  is  whether  the  old  system  of  collecting  the  tax  by 
the  district  authorities  should  be  retained  and  improved  or 
a  new  and  separate  machinery  be  created.  The  creation 
of  a  new  machinery  will,  of  course,  entail  great  expenditure. 
But  on  the  other  hand,  whether  the  existing  system  of  en- 
trusting the  collection  of  the  tax  to  the  administrative 
officers  could  be  made  to  work  with  reasonable  efficiency 
is  a  serious  question. 

These,  then,  are  some  of  the  fundamental  defects  of  the 
system  as  it  existed  under  Tsing  dynasty  and  as  it  still 
exists  today  to  a  large  extent  at  least.  There  are  of  course 
many  other  difficulties  that  might  be  mentioned.  But  the 
most  important  difficulties  will  be  found  in  one  of  the  five 
groups  of  defects  presented. 


CHAPTER  X 

THE  LAND  TAX  AND  THE  PROBLEM  OF  SEPARATION  OF 
NATIONAL,  PROVINCIAL  AND  LOCAL  REVENUES 

ONE  of  the  most  important  questions  that  has  risen  in 
connection  with  the  movement  of  the  land-tax  reform  in 
China  is  the  question  of  the  separation  of  national,  provin- 
cial and  local  revenues.  For  many  hundreds,  if  not  thou- 
sands, of  years  China  has  been  a  highly  centralized  govern- 
ment. In  the  Manchu  dynasty  all  officials,  from  the  prime 
minister  down  to  the  lowest  local  official  of  the  district,  were 
appointed  by  the  central  government  and  maintained,  at  least 
theoretically,  by  the  imperial  exchequer.  The  other  ex- 
penses of  administration  of  the  provincial  as  well  as  the 
local  governments  were  also  paid  out  of  the  Peking  treas- 
ury, to  which  all  the  revenues  of  the  empire  were  return- 
able. It  is  true,  as  Morse  points  out,  that  part  of  these 
revenues  were  never  remitted  to  Peking  but  were  paid  out 
directly  from  the  sources  of  collection  to  certain  defined 
heads  of  the  imperial  expenditure; 1  but  in  theory  all  reve- 
nues were  returnable  to  the  imperial  exchequer.  There  is 
no  distinction  between  national,  provincial  and  local  rev- 
enues. 

In  the  early  years  of  the  Manchu  dynasty  the  provincial 
authorities  were  required  to  submit  annually  a  book  of 
estimates  showing  the  estimated  revenues  for  the  coming 
year.  These  provincial  estimates  were  then  entered  by  the 

1  Morse,  op.  cit.t  pp.  78-79. 
130  [398 


399]  SEPARATION  OF  REVENUES  131 

board  of  finance  in  the  "  Red  Book,"  which  may  be  called 
the  budget  of  the  Empire.  This  procedure  was,  however, 
modified  after  the  middle  of  the  last  century  when,  as  a 
result  of  contact  with  western  countries,  the  expenditures  of 
the  government  were  greatly  increased.  In  order  to  meet 
these  new  and  increasing  expenditures  additional  revenues 
had  to  be  raised.  They  were  apportioned  in  the  main 
among  the  provinces,  whose  authorities  were  given  large 
freedom  in  selecting  the  ways  and  means  of  raising  them. 
This  practice  was  justifiable,  for  many  of  the  reforms  in- 
troduced, such  as  the  improvement  of  the  army,  the  intro- 
duction of  the  modern  educational  system,  and  the  adoption 
of  the  police  system,  were  effected  in  the  provinces.  As  the 
economic  conditions  of  the  different  provinces  were  very 
dissimilar,  it  was  proper  for  the  central  government  to 
leave  the  provincial,  and  in  some  cases  the  local  authorities 
to  their  own  resources  to  meet  these  new  expenditures.1 

As  a  result  of  this  practice  there  arose  in  provincial 
finances  a  division  of  revenues  into  the  Revenue  for  Ex- 
ternal Expenditure,  including  all  the  revenues  hitherto  re- 
ported to  the  central  government  in  the  annual  book  of 
estimate,  and  the  revenue  for  internal  expenditure,  em- 
bracing all  the  imposts  newly  devised  to  meet  the  new  ex- 
penditures of  the  administration.  This  distinction  between 
the  old  and  the  new  revenues  in  the  provinces  was  retained 
until  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  Kwang-Hsu  (1877- 
1909)  when  a  reorganization  of  the  financial  system  was 
effected  by  the  Board  of  Finance.  All  the  new  revenues 
introduced  during  the  last  decade  and  not  embodied  in  the 
annual  report  of  previous  years  were  at  that  time  amal- 
gamated with  the  so-called  old  revenues  and  reported  to 
the  central  government. 

1  Finances  of  the  Republic,  vol.  i,  pp.  128-129. 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [400 

This  complete  amalgamation,  however,  is  true  only  in 
theory.  It  is  a  well-known  fact  that  under  the  Manchu 
regime  almost  all  officials  and  administrators  of  the  gov- 
ernment were  underpaid.  A  large  part  of  the  taxes  col- 
lected was  therefore  retained  by  the  official  class  to  defray 
expenses  of  the  administration  and  the  cost  of  their  own 
maintenance.1  The  taxes  returned  to  the  imperial  exchequer 
represented  only  a  fraction  of  the  actual  revenues  collected 
from  the  taxpayers,  a  situation  that  was  especially  true  of 
the  land  tax.  In  one  of  the  previous  chapters  we  have 
shown  that  the  tax  reported  to  the  government  repre- 
sented only  a  very  small  part  of  the  amount  actually  paid 
by  the  people.2  This  unreturned  part  of  the  tax  went 
to  meet  the  expenses  of  the  provincial  and  local  administra- 
tions. They  might,  therefore,  be  called  the  provincial  and 
local  revenues.  It  has  been  estimated  by  Morse  that,  taking 
the  amount  collected  under  "  accretion  "  8  as  representing 
the  general  expenses  of  the  provincial  administration,  and 
the  amount  collected  under  "  collector's  charges  "  as  repre- 
senting the  expenditure  of  the  local  and  municipal  adminis- 
trations, the  annual  provincial  revenues  would  amount  to 
more  than  one  and  one-half  as  much  as  the  imperial  or 
national  revenue  and  those  of  the  localities  would  amount 
to  about  half  of  the  imperial  revenues.4  Whether  these 
estimates  are  approximately  correct  or  not  we,  of  course, 
do  not  know,  but  it  is  probable  that  the  unreported  amount 
of  taxes  collected  from  the  people  amounted  to  several  times 
the  amount  reported. 

1  Cf.  supra,  pp.  128-129. 

2  Cf.  supra,  ch.  vii. 

8  By  accretion  he  means  the  extra  charges  which  have  been  attached 
to  the  legal  rate  of  the  land  tax. 
4  Morse,  op.  cit.,  pp.  112-113. 


40i  ]  SEPARA TION  OF  REVENUES  1 33 

It  was  the  recognition  of  these  facts  that  brought  abount 
the  movement  to  separate  the  national  and  local  revenues. 
It  was  maintained  that  before  any  reform  could  be  effected  in 
the  fiscal  system  of  China  these  unreported  revenues  must 
be  accounted  for,  and  that  a  clear  demarcation  must  be 
drawn  between  national,  provincial  and  local  revenues.  In 
drawing  this  demarcation  it  is  advocated  by  many  writers 
that  the  land  tax,  as  the  one  must  suitable  for  local  pur- 
poses, should  be  set  aside  once  for  all  for  the  use  of  the 
provincial  and  local  administrations.1 

Whether  it  is  advisable  and  feasible  for  China  to  leave 
this  tax  to  the  provincial  and  local  authorities  is  one  of  the 
most  important  fiscal  problems  that  China  is  called  upon  to 
face.  It  is  desirable,  therefore,  to  consider  it  here  in  so  far 
as  it  is  related  to  the  problem  of  the  land-tax  reform. 

The  first  step  toward  establishing  a  clear  demarcation 
between  the  national  and  provincial  revenues  was  taken  in 
1909,  when,  in  a  joint  memorial  presented  to  the  Emperor 
by  the  National  Advisory  Council  and  the  Bureau  of  Con- 
stitutional Investigation  it  was  provided  that  during  the  nine 
years  of  preparation  for  the  adoption  of  the  constitution 
the  separation  of  national  and  local  revenues  should  be 
effected  in  the  third,  fourth  and  fifth  years.  In  accordance 
with  this  provision  there  was  made  a  separation  of  the  local 
expenditure  from  the  national  expenditure  in  the  budget  of 
the  third  year  of  Hsuan-Tung,  which  was  the  first  budget 
of  China  prepared  according  to  modern  budgetary  prin- 
ciples. 

During  the  Revolution  of  1911-1912  the  Chinese  fiscal 
system  suffered  a  complete  breakdown.  As  a  result  of  the 
heavy  military  expenditure  of  the  provinces  and  the  dis- 
organization of  the  tax-collecting  machinery,  the  remit- 

1  Finance  of  the  Republic,  vol.  i,  p.  197. 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA 


[402 


tances  from  the  provinces  to  the  central  government  at 
Peking  were  entirely  suspended  during  the  period  of  dis- 
turbance and  for  months  after  the  Republic  was  estab- 
lished. The  first  task  to  which  the  Peking  government 
turned  its  attention  after  the  Republic  was  established  was 
the  reorganization  of  the  financial  system  of  the  country. 

Among  the  problems  that  arose  in  connection  with  the 
reorganization  of  the  financial  system  was  that  of  the  sep- 
aration of  national  and  local  revenues.  One  of  the  most 
ardent  advocates  was  Governor  Cheng  of  Kiangsu  Prov- 
ince, who  maintained  that  before  the  financial  system  of  the 
country  could  be  put  on  a  permanent  and  efficient  basis  the 
national  revenue  would  have  to  be  separated  from  the  local 
revenue.  He  maintained  further  that  the  national  revenue 
should  be  derived  from  the  customs,  the  salt  gabelle  and 
other  taxes  of  a  national  character;  and  that  the  land  tax 
should  be  left  entirely  to  the  provincial  and  local  author- 
ities. The  proposal  of  the  Governor  received  wide  support 
throughout  the  country.  Liang  Ch'i-ch'ao,  probably  the 
most  eminent  modern  scholar  of  China  to-day,  and  recently 
the  minister  of  finance,  was  also  in  favor  of  the  movement.1 

On  the  surface  it  may  seem  that  this  tax,  which  has  been 
for  thousands  of  years  one  of  the  main  sources  of  revenue 
in  China,  could  not  possibly  be  appropriated  for  local  pur- 
poses. A  more  careful  study  of  the  problem  will,  however, 
reveal  the  fact  that  the  proposal  has  some  very  strong 
points. 

In  the  first  place,  it  was  maintained  by  the  supporters  of 
the  plan  that  the  returns  from  the  land  tax  represented 
only  a  fraction  of  the  actual  amount  collected  from  the  tax- 

1  For  a  series  of  very  valuable  articles  in  favor  of  the  appropriation 
of  the  land  tax  for  local  purposes  see  The  Justice,  vol.  i,  nos.  i-io. 
The  Justice  is  a  bimonthly  edited  by  Liang  Ch'i-ch'ao,  published  in 
Tientsin. 


403]  SEPARATION  OF  REVENUES  135 

payers.  The  amount  reported  was  at  the  most  only  a  third 
of  the  total  collected  from  the  people.  It  was  true  that  this 
amount  was  swallowed  up  by  the  provincial  and  local  offi- 
cials; but  they  were  very  much  underpaid,  and  had  it  not 
been  for  this  so-called  "  squeeze "  they  could  never  have 
maintained  themselves  and  carried  on  the  work  entrusted  to 
them.  These  collections,  although  unrecognized  by  law, 
were  therefore  just  as  much  a  part  of  the  administrative 
expenditure  as  the  other  governmental  disbursements. 

It  was  also  a  fact  that  a  large  part  of  the  amount  officially 
returned  to  the  central  government  was  sent  back  to  the 
provinces  to  meet  provincial  and  local  administrative  ex- 
penses. No  exact  statement  of  the  proportion  could  be 
made  on  account  of  lack  of  reliable  statistical  data,  but  it 
was  shown  that  in  the  province  of  Chihli,  for  instance,  less 
than  half  of  the  revenue  collected  there  was  returned  to  the 
central  government  in  the  Manchu  dynasty.1  The  appro- 
priation of  the  land  tax  by  the  provincial  and  local  author- 
ities would  therefore  not  entail  an  unbearable  hardship  on 
the  central  government.  Moreover,  as  a  condition  to  the 
transfer,  some  of  the  other  taxes,  part  of  which  had  hitherto 
been  retained  by  the  provincial  and  local  authorities,  could 
be  remitted  to  the  central  government  in  their  entirety. 
The  appropriation  of  the  land  tax  to  the  provincial  and  local 
governments,  therefore,  was  a  proposal  which  meant  only 
a  readjustment  of  the  revenues  of  the  central  and  the  pro- 
vincial governments  and  does  not  involve  any  appropria- 
tion- of  the  provincial  revenues  by  the  central  government. 

In  the  second  place,  it  was  argued  by  the  advocates  of 
separation  that  the  chaotic  condition  of  the  land  tax  in 
China  is  due  largely  to  the  nature  of  the  tax,  which  is  inti- 
mately related  to  the  local  economic  conditions.  In  the 
early  days,  when  economic  conditions  of  the  country  were 

1  The  Justice,  vol.  i,  pp.  223-224. 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [404 

fairly  uniform,  it  was  feasible  for  the  central  government 
to  collect  the  tax  with  some  degree  of  efficiency  and  fair- 
ness. But  the  practice  had  outgrown  itself  when  the  terri- 
tory of  the  country  became  large  and  economic  conditions 
varied,  and  it  is  not  now  feasible  for  the  central  government 
to  administer  the  tax  efficiently.  It  is  true  that  as  a  whole 
China  is  still  very  backward  economically.  But  conditions 
within  the  country  do  vary  considerably.  The  provinces 
near  the  coast  are  transforming  themselves  from  an  agri- 
cultural to  an  industrial  economy,  while  those  in  the  interior 
are  still  primitive  in  their  economic  development.  It  was 
therefore  natural  that  the  tax  should  outgrow  the  restric- 
tions of  the  law  and  adapt  itself  to  the  varied  local  condi- 
tions. The  administration  of  a  tax  covering  such  an  exten- 
sive territory  had  become  unwieldly,  and  it  was  maintained 
that  many  of  the  difficulties  would  be  remedied  by  local- 
izing the  tax. 

In  the  third  place,  it  was  argued  that,  owing  to  the  ex- 
istence of  different  units  of  measurement  and  different  rates 
of  taxation  in  various  places  it  would  be  impossible  for  the 
central  government  to  establish  any  unified  system  of  col- 
lection. In  the  southern  and  central  parts  of  the  country 
the  usual  unit  of  measurement  is  the  mow,  varying  consid- 
erably from  place  to  place,  while  in  certain  parts  of  the 
north,  as  the  province  of  Chie-ling,  the  unit  of  land  meas- 
urement is  the  tien,  equivalent  to  about  ten  mow.  These 
differences  have  an  historical  background.  It  was  argued 
that  if  the  tax  were  appropriated  by  the  provincial  author- 
ities it  could  be  reformed  according  to  the  existing  condi- 
tions with  much  less  disturbance  to  the  people. 

In  the  fourth  place,  it  was  maintained  that  China  is 
mainly  an  agricultural  country  and  that  agricultural  condi- 
tions in  the  different  parts  of  the  country  vary  greatly. 
Conditions  in  China  proper  are  different  from  those  of  the 


405]  SEPARATION  OF  REVENUES  137 

dependencies,  and  those  in  China  Proper  itself  differ  from 
province  to  province,  and  even  from  district  to  district.  The 
land  tax  is  a  tax  that  touches  closely  the  agrarian  popula- 
tion, and  it  would  therefore  be  inadvisable  to  establish  a 
uniform  rate  for  the  entire  country.  In  some  of  the  richer 
and  more  developed  provinces  where  the  farmers  have 
better  facilities  for  selling  their  products  the  tax  may  and 
should  be  heavier  than  in  the  interior  provinces  where  the 
community  is  poor  and  the  means  of  communication  primi- 
tive.1 

Even  though  the  lands  were  graded,  as  has  been  a  prac- 
tice in  China,  the  rates  could  not  be  applied  to  the  whole 
country  without  gross  injustice.  The  lowest  rate  in  the 
rich,  well-developed  province  may  be  too  high  for  even  the 
best  kind  of  land  in  the  backward  provinces.  The  differ- 
ence in  the  purchasing  power  of  money  in  the  different 
localities  must  also  be  taken  into  consideration.  Probably 
there  is  no  other  country  in  the  world  to-day  where  the 
same  unit  of  money  has  such  a  varying  purchasing  power. 
In  the  backward  provinces  the  unit  of  money  has  many 
times  the  purchasing  power  of  same  unit  in  province? 
where  modern  industries  and  commerce  have  been  devel- 
oped, and  to  apply  the  same  rate  to  both  communities  would 
therefore  be  decidedly  inequitable.  It  was  contended  that 
if  the  tax  were  left  to  the  localities  such  differences  could 
be  better  adjusted. 

Fifthly,  it  was  pointed  out  that  if  the  tax  were  appro- 
priated by  the  provincial  and  local  authorities  the  reform 
could  be  more  rapidly  and  effectively  made.  One  of  the 
great  difficulties  that  have  retarded  the  reform  of  the  tax  is 
the  hugeness  of  the  task.  For  many  years  the  attention  of 
the  government  has  been  directed  to  the  necessity  of  reform- 
ing the  tax;2  but  on  account  of  the  extensive  territory  in- 

1  The  Justice,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  379.  2  Cf.  infra,  p.  146. 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [406 

volved  and  the  great  variation  of  conditions  existing  therein 
it  has  not  been  found  feasible  to  launch  the  reform.  It  is 
now  claimed  that  if  the  task  be  undertaken  by  the  provinces 
it  could  be  more  easily  carried  out,  inasmuch  as  the  terri- 
tory to  be  covered  would  be  smaller  and  conditions  less 
divergent.  The  work  could  be  started  in  the  more  progres- 
sive provinces  where  the  means  of  communication  are  better 
developed  and  the  people  more  enlightened.  If  success  is 
achieved  in  one  province,  the  other  will  follow  in  its  foot- 
steps and  profit  by  its  experience. 

The  appropriation  of  this  tax  to  local  purposes  will  also 
act  as  a  strong  inducement  to  the  people,  as  well  as  to  the 
authorities  of  the  province,  to  carry  out  the  reform.  Most 
of  the  provinces  in  China  to-day  are  greatly  in  need  of 
funds  to  carry  out  needed  reforms  in  the  provincial  and 
local  governments,  and  they  have  no  source  from  which 
to  derive  these  funds.  If  they  were  given  the  land  tax,  it  is 
claimed,  they  would  be  only  too  eager  to  start  the  reform 
and  to  increase  their  revenues. 

The  appropriation  of  this  tax  to  the  local  authorities  does 
not,  of  course,  debar  the  central  government  from  giving 
assistance  to  the  provincial  authorities  in  carrying  on  the 
work.  The  central  government  may  exercise  a  considerable 
measure  of  supervision  and  control  over  the  work  of  the 
provinces. 

In  the  sixth  place,  it  was  argued  that  the  separation  of 
provincial  from  national  revenues  will  encourage  the  de- 
velopment of  the  provincial  and  local  governments.  In 
theory  the  Chinese  government  is  a  highly  centralized  one, 
but  in  practice  the  central  government  does  very  little  for 
the  people.  Up  to  only  a  decade  ago  there  was  no  public 
education,  no  police  system,  no  sanitary  system  in  the  coun- 
try. It  may  almost  be  said  that  China  had  been  a  country 
with  a  minimum  of  government.  But  conditions  have 
changed.  With  the  progress  of  the  country  modern  systems 


407]  SEPARATION  OF  REVENUES  139 

of  public  education,  modern  police  system,  and  public- 
utility  services  of  various  kinds  have  been  introduced  and 
must  be  extended  as  time  goes  on.  In  other  words,  the 
activities  of  the  provincial  and  local  governments  are  on  the 
increase  and  demand  an  increasing  expenditure.  If  the  land 
tax  be  appropriated  to  the  provinces  these  activities  of  the 
local  and  provincial  governments  will  be  greatly  encouraged 
and  increased. 

It  was  also  pointed  out  in  this  connection  that  although 
the  provincial  and  local  activities  of  the  country  as  a  whole 
have  increased  and  are  bound  to  increase  with  the  progress 
and  development  of  the  country,  they  vary  naturally  from 
province  to  province.  Some  provinces  have  greater  possi- 
bilities and  are  more  progressive  than  others.  Local  reve- 
nues must,  therefore,  be  adjusted  to  meet  the  local  condi- 
tions, and  adjustments  can  best  be  made  by  placing  the  land 
tax  in  the  hands  of  the  local  authorities. 

In  the  seventh  place,  it  was  contended  that  the  appropria- 
tion of  the  land  tax  for  local  purposes  conforms  to  the  prin- 
ciples of  taxation.  Practically  all  authorities  are  agreed 
that  the  land  tax  is  the  least  suitable  source  of  revenue  for 
the  central  government  of  a  country  that  has  passed  the 
stage  of  simple  agricultural  economy  and  entered  upon  the 
era  of  industrial  and  commercial  economy.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  land  tax  is  a  very  desirable  source  of  revenue  for 
the  local  governments.  Bastable  was  quoted  as  saying 
"  both  abstract  reasoning  and  experience  tend  to  show 
that  a  large  proportion  of  the  local  taxation  must  be  ob- 
tained from  this  important  'object'  (land).  In  the  rural 
districts  there  is  little  else  to  be  taxed,  and  in  the  case  of 
towns  the  value  of  the  land  is  so  much  increased  by  the 
action  of  social  conditions  that  it  forms  a  most  suitable 
mark  for  the  larger  taxation  that  the  wants  of  the  urban 
societies  make  necessary."  l 

1  Bastable,  Public  Finance,  pp.  361-362  and  also  The  Justice,  vol.  i, 
pp.  58-60. 


I40  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [408 

In  this  connection  the  advocates  of  the  localization  of  the 
land  tax  also  pointed  out  that  in  presenting  this  change  they 
were  not  unmindful  of  the  fact  that  in  several  of  the  for- 
eign countries,  such  as  France,  Italy  and  Japan,  the  land  tax 
still  remains  in  the  hands  of  the  central  governments,  which 
derive  considerable  amount  of  revenue  from  this  source  of 
taxation.  But  they  argued  that  China  is  a  far  greater 
country  than  any  of  these,  and  that  the  conditions  within 
one  province  probably  present  greater  variation  than  those 
in  any  one  of  the  foreign  countries  mentioned.  The  land 
tax  is  of  such  a  nature  that  it  could  not  be  administered 
efficiently  when  the  territory  it  covers  is  extensive  and  the 
conditions  vary  greatly. 

In  the  eighth  place,  and  lastly,  it  was  maintained  that  in 
reforming  the  tax  some  kind  of  cadastre,  which  experience 
has  proved  to  be  a  necessary  instrument  for  successful  ad- 
ministration of  this  tax,  would  have  to  be  made.  This  is  a 
task  that  requires  extensive  as  well  as  intensive  work.  It 
took  Japan  nine  years  before  that  little  country  completed  its 
cadastral  survey,  and  France  worked  for  some  thirty-three 
years  before  her  cadastre  was  finished.  If  the  reform  in 
China  is  to  be  undertaken  by  the  central  government,  how 
many  years  will  it  take  to  complete  the  work  ?  The  cadastre, 
including  valuation  of  the  land  for  taxation,  not  only  takes 
time  and  labor,  but  it  also  requires  constant  and  careful  re- 
vision and  readjustment  in  order  to  be  complete  and  to  reflect 
accurately  the  changing  economic  conditions  of  the  locality. 
In  the  provinces  where  economic  evolution  is  going  on  at  a 
rapid  pace  the  cadastre  needs  frequent  revision;  while  in 
the  more  backward  provinces  where  the  economic  condi- 
tions are  more  stationary,  the  cadastre  will  hold  good  for 
many  years.  If  the  tax  be  left  to  local  bodies  these  differ- 
ences can  be  taken  care  of  more  easily. 

Furthermore,  it  was  claimed  that  if  the  cadastre  is  com- 


409]  SEPARATION  OF  REVENUES  141 

piled  by  the  provincial  and  local  authorities  who  know  the 
conditions  within  their  respective  territories  it  will  probably 
be  more  accurate  and  conform  more  intimately  with  local 
conditions. 

These,  then,  are  the  main  reasons  that  have  been  ad- 
vanced in  favor  of  the  separation  of  the  national  and  the 
local  revenues  in  general  and  the  localization  of  the  land 
tax  in  particular.  Some  of  these  arguments  are  valid,  but 
others,  although  plausible,  are  in  reality  specious  and  eco- 
nomically unsound.  It  will  not  be  necessary  to  go  into  a 
detailed  discussion  and  criticism  of  these  arguments  here. 
Suffice  it  to  point  out  that  in  view  of  the  financial  difficulties 
of  the  central  government  and  the  tendency  toward  concen- 
tration rather  than  decentralization  of  government  in  the 
country,  it  is  not  unlikely  that  the  central  government  will 
give  to  the  local  authorities  this  important  source  of  reve- 
nue which  has  almost  from  time  immemorial  been  the  main 
source  of  national  revenue. 

It  may  also  be  observed  here  that  besides  this  group 
who  advocated  the  appropriation  of  the  land  tax  for  local 
purposes  there  is  another  whose  members  maintained  a 
narrower  view  of  the  question.  They  urged,  not  the 
localization  of  the  entire  revenue  from  the  land  tax,  but 
only  the  appropriation  of  the  "  grain  tributes  "  for  such 
purposes.  The  revenue  of  the  land  tax  consisted,  as  we 
have  seen,  of  three  groups  of  taxes,  namely,  the  land- 
capitation  tax,  the  grain-tributes  and  the  rents  of  govern- 
ment land.  The  grain  tribute  was  not  levied,  however,  on 
the  entire  country.  Out  of  the  eighteen  provinces,  only 
eight  had  this  levy  *  and  six  of  these  had  already  com- 
muted the  tributes  into  a  money  payment.  It  was  in 
Kiangsu  and  Chekiang  that  the  tributes  were  still  levied  in 

1  The  eight  provinces  are  Kiangsu,  Anhui,  Chekiang,  Kiangsi,  Hunan, 
Hupeh,  Shantung  and  Honan. 


I42  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [410 

kind  when  the  Manchu  government  was  overthrown.  The 
rates  were  also  heaviest  in  these  two  provinces.  After  the 
establishment  of  the  Republic  the  people  in  the  eight  prov- 
inces, especially  Kiangsu  and  Chekiang,  came  out  very 
strongly  in  support  of  the  position  that  these  levies  violated 
the  principle  of  equality,  first  as  between  the  provinces,  and 
secondly  as  between  the  taxpayers,  and  that  they  therefore 
should  be  appropriated  for  local  purposes.  The  agitation 
developed  not  only  in  the  central  but  also  in  the  provincial 
legislative  assemblies.  Many  districts  in  Chekiang  even  re- 
fused to  continue  to  pay  the  tax.  The  refusal  on  the  part  of 
Chekiang  to  pay  affected  immediately  its  neighbor  Kiangsu, 
where  disturbances  also  occurred  when  the  government  tried 
to  collect  the  tax.  For  a  time  the  agitation  threatened  to 
assume  serious  proportions. 

The  central  government,  however,  refused  to  comply  with 
the  requests  of  the  two  provinces.  In  the  first  place,  the 
government  maintained  that  this  tax  did  not  violate  the 
principle  of  equality  among  the  provinces,  for,  although 
only  Kiangsu  and  Chekiang  and  six  other  provinces  paid 
the  grain  tributes  either  in  money  or  in  kind,  a  tax  in  grain 
had  been  levied  on  almost  every  other  province.  The  dif- 
ference between  the  so-called  grain-tribute  provinces  and 
the  non-grain-tribute  provinces  lay  simply  in  the  fact  that 
the  grain-tribute  provinces  had  to  contribute  the  grain  as 
well  as  the  expenses  for  transporting  it  to  the  capital.  The 
difference  was  a  historical  one.  Originally  these  eight  prov- 
inces were  made  to  transport  the  grain  to  Peking  simply 
because  of  their  geographical  proximity  to  the  capital  and 
the  better  means  of  communication  at  their  disposal.  The 
eight  provinces  occupy  the  central  part  of  the  country  and 
four  of  them  are  traversed  by  the  Grand  Canal,  which  was 
formerly  the  most  important  means  of  inland  transportation 
in  China.  Historically  considered,  the  grain  tribute  was 


4i  j ]  SEPARATION  OF  REVENUES  143 

not,  the  central  government  maintained,  an  extra  burden  on 
these  eight  provinces. 

The  apparent  inequity  of  this  extra  burden  of  transport- 
ing the  grain  could  also  be  accounted  for,  so  urged  the  gov- 
ernment, on  the  traditional  principle  that  "  in  the  Northwest 
the  tax  is  light  but  services  heavy,  and  in  the  Southeast  the 
tax  heavy  but  services  light."  x  Originally  the  provinces  in 
the  northwest  had  to  render  certain  "  services  "  in  labor  toi 
the  government,  besides  paying  the  rice  tax.  In  the  course 
of  time  many — in  fact,  most — of  these  services  were  com- 
muted. In  the  southeast  no  such  services  were  required,  and 
therefore  the  grain  tributes  were  levied  at  higher  rates,  part 
of  which  went  to*  pay  for  the  transportation  charges. 

It  was  also  claimed  by  these  two  provinces  that  these 
tributes  were  levied  for  the  purpose  of  supporting  the  im- 
perial household  and  sacrifices  at  the  temples,  and  that  as 
the  form  of  government  had  been  changed  these  levies 
should  be  discontinued.  In  reply  to  this  argument  the 
Ministry  of  Finance  pointed  out  that,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
only  a  small  part  of  these  tributes  went  to  the  support  of  the 
imperial  household,  the  amount  being  probably  no  more 
than  one- tenth.  The  main  bulk  was  used  as  "  soldiers' 
grain,  charity  grain,  prison-keepers'  grain  and  salary 
grain."  In  other  words,  these  tributes  were  appropriated 
to  meet  part  of  the  administrative  expenditure  of  the  gov- 
ernment. 

The  result  of  this  agitation  and  controversy  was  that  the 
grain  tributes  of  the  two  provinces  Chekiang  and  Kiangsu, 
were  finally  commuted  into  money  payment,  but  the  revenue 
thus  collected  was  required  to  be  sent  to  Peking  as  before.8 

lCf.  The  Finance  of  the  Republic,  vol.  i,  pp.  119-120. 

3  Cf.  Statement  of  the  Ministry  of  Finance  in  reply  to  the  requests 
of  the  grain- tribute  provinces  in  Finance,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  pp.  120-121. 

3  The  rate  of  conversion  was  fixed  at  $4.00  per  shih,  which  was  con- 
siderably lower  than  what  was  collected  in  the  Tsing  dynasty. 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [4x2 

The  whole  problem  of  the  appropriation  of  the  land  tax 
for  local  purposes  and  the  question  of  the  separation  of 
national  and  local  revenues  was  then  submitted  to  a  special 
committee  for  investigation  in  the  fall  of  the  first  year  of 
the  Republic  (1912).  The  committee  reported  that  inas- 
much as  some  of  the  fundamental  questions  in  regard  to  the 
reorganization  of  the  territorial  divisions  of  the  country 
and  the  extent  of  their  respective  activities  had  not  yet 
been  settled  the  question  of  separation  of  revenue  could  not 
be  determined  definitely. 

Meantime,  in  order  to  reorganize  the  finances  of  the 
country  which  had  been  put  out  of  gear  by  the  revolution  a 
national  revenue  board  was  created  under  the  auspices  of 
the  Ministry  of  Finance  to  supervise  and  control  the  reve- 
nues of  the  central  government  which  had  heretofore  been 
in  the  hands  of  the  provincial  authorities.  The  headquar- 
ters of  this  board  are  at  Peking  but  there  are  branches  in 
the  provinces.  These  branches,  in  addition  to  many  other 
duties,  supervise  the  collection  of  all  revenues  belonging  to 
the  central  government.  In  order  to  care  for  the  other 
taxes  which  were  purely  provincial  in  character  the  office  of 
provincial  treasurer  was  created.  With  the  creation  of 
separate  financial  agencies  a  demarkation  between  the 
sources  of  the  national  and  provincial  revenues  was  also 
established,  and  among  the  taxes  set  aside  as  distinctively 
national  was  the  land  tax.  The  provincial  and  local  au- 
thorities, however,  are  allowed  to  add  additional  levies  to 
it  provided  they  do  not  exceed  thirty  per  cent.  In  case 
of  special  needs  this  limitation  may  be  set  aside  provided 
the  permission  of  the  central  government  is  first  obtained. 
The  subdivision  of  these  additional  levies  is  left  to  the 
localities.  This,  then,  is  the  situation  at  present,  and  there 
is  little  likelihood  that  it  will  be  disturbed  for  some  time 
to  come. 


CHAPTER  XI 
THE  LAND  TAX  REFORM 

FROM  the  foregoing  discussion  it  is  apparent  that  the 
land  tax  system  of  China  is  antiquated  in  its  principles  and 
defective  in  its  administration.  The  need  for  reform  is 
made  imperative  by  the  pressure  of  the  financial  situation. 
For  the  greater  part  of  two  of  China's  three  largest  sources 
of  revenue  has  been  consumed  in  repaying  loans  and  meeting 
war  indemnities.  The  three  great  sources  o>f  national  reve- 
nue are  the  customs,  the  salt  gabelle  and  the  land  tax.  The 
customs  receipts  and  a  large  part  of  the  salt  gabelle  have 
been  absorbed  by  these  expenditures,  leaving  to  the  gov- 
ernment for  general  expenditures  only  the  land  tax.  This 
situation  is  responsible  for  a  large  part  of  China's  financial 
difficulties.  It  is  true  that  since  its  reorganization  the  salt 
gabelle  has  yielded  to  the  government  more  than  was  ex- 
pected, and  can  probably  be  made  still  more  productive; 
and  furthermore,  that  a  considerable  increase  of  revenue 
may  be  expected  from  the  revision  of  the  tariff,  to  which  the 
powers  with  whom  China  has  treaty  agreements  in  regard! 
to  her  tariff  have  already  given  their  consent.  But  such  in- 
creases will  necessarily  be  limited  in  amount  and  cannot  be 
expected  to  contribute  adequate  relief.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  present  yield  of  the  land  tax  is  very  small  for  a  country 
as  large  and  populous  as  China — the  wastefulness  and  in- 
efficiency of  the  collection  system  are  almost  incredible.  With 
proper  reorganization  the  tax  can  be  made  to  yield  several 
413]  145 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [414 

times  its  present  amount.1  In  this  chapter  several  of  the 
proposals  of  reforming  the  tax  will  be  analyzed  and  their 
merits  from  both  the  theoretical  and  practical  points  of  view 
will  be  discussed. 

The  question  of  reform  of  the  land  tax  is  not  a  new  one. 
For  more  than  a  decade  there  has  been  a  constant  agitation  of 
the  subject.  The  first  systematic  proposal  was  made  by  the 
late  Sir  Robert  Hart  in  1904,  when  the  Chinese  government 
was  seeking  for  ways  and  means  of  raising  funds  for  the 
development  of  her  army.  "  Of  late  there  have  been  not  a 
few  persons/*  said  Hart  in  his  Memorandum  to  the  Chinese 
government,  "  who  have  been  discussing  the  question  of 
raising  funds,  and  there  have  not  been  wanting  suggestions 
as  to  how  to  procure  such  funds.  In  my  humble  opinion, 
however,  the  most  tangible  and  feasible  of  all  measures, 
comparatively  speaking,  at  hand  is  that  of  reorganizing  the 
land  and  the  poll  taxes  of  the  Empire/' 2  Sir  Robert  found 
that  the  dimensions  of  China,  excluding  Chinese  Turkestan, 
Mongolia  and  the  three  Manchurian  provinces,  were  four 
thousand  li  long  and  as  many  in  breadth,  making  an  area 
of  no  less  than  sixteen  million  square  li.  To  every  li  there 
are  five  hundred  and  forty  mow,  according  to  Chinese  meas- 
urement. Taking,  however,  five  hundred  li  to  the  square 
mow,  there  should  be  eight  thousand  million  mow  to  an 
area  of  sixteen  million  square  li.  Then  he  showed  that 
according  to  the  estimate  of  the  late  Marquis  Li  Hung- 
chang  no  less  than  two-thirds  of  the  eighteen  provinces,  or 
China  proper,  are  cultivated  area  and  should  pay  taxes. 
Taking  the  cultivated  area,  however,  at  one-half,  which 
according  to  Sir  Robert  is  a  very  conservative  estimate  in 

1  Cf.  infra,  pp.  156-157. 

*  The  text  of  the  Memorandum  can  be  found  in  either  Special  Series, 
no.  26  (1904)  of  the  Reports  of  the  Chinese  Customs  Service  or  North 
China  Herald  (Shanghai),  vol.  Ixxii,  no.  1914  (April  15,  1904). 


415]  THE  LAND  TAX  REFORM  147 

view  of  the  large  population  of  the  country  and  wide  culti- 
vation of  the  land,  there  should  be  4,000,000,000  taxable 
mow.  If  a  land  tax  of  two  hundred  cash  be  assessed  on 
one  mow,  with  a  liberal  rate  of  exchange  of  two  thousand 
cash  to  the  silver  tael,  the  land  tax  should  yield  Tls.  400,- 
000,000. 1 

Having  estimated  the  possible  yield  of  the  tax,  he  then 
went  on  to  show  how  the  reforms  might  be  effected  and 
the  estimated  yield  realized.  The  scheme,  he  proposed, 
should  be  started  in  one  of  the  districts  of  the  province  in 
which  the  system  was  first  to  be  put  into  effect.  The  magis- 
trate of  the  selected  district,  who  was  to  be  assisted  by  ten 
competent  officials,  would  begin  the  work  by  dividing  the 
district  into  four  sections  and  requiring  each  owner  of 
land  within  his  jurisdiction  to  file  within  one  month  a 
statement  setting  forth  the  amount  of  land  he  possessed, 
its  location  and  boundaries,  with  the  necessary  maps.  After 
the  landowner  had  registered  his  landed  property  in  the 
magistrate's  yamen  he  was  to  be  given  an  order  setting 
down  the  amount  of  land  he  possessed  and  "  commanding 
him  personally  to  appear  at  the  said  yamen  at  the  beginning 
of  the  tenth  moon  of  each  year,  and  there,  according  to  the 
number  of  mow,  set  down  in  the  document  or  order,  to  pay 
the  land  tax  thereon  at  the  rate  of  two  hundred  copper  cash 
per  nww"  2  No  extra  charge  whatever  should  be  allowed  to 
be  collected  from  the  taxpayer.  The  foregoing  work,  includ- 
ing the  issuing  of  the  proclamation,  the  presentation  of  the 
landowners'  declarations  of  property  owned  by  them  and 
the  registration  of  the  same,  was  to  be  accomplished  in  three 
months.  At  the  end  of  the  three  months  after  the  new 
system  had  been  inaugurated  in  the  district  the  magistrate 

1  The  actual  yield  of  the  tax  at  that  time  was  about  Tls.  25,000,000. 
1  North  China  Herald,  loc.  cit,  p.  777. 


I48  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [416 

would  be  required  to  make  a  detailed  report  to  the  prefect  as 
to  the  number  of  mow  registered  and  the  amount  of  tax 
collectible  in  his  district.  The  prefect  would  then  report  to 
the  provincial  authorities',  who  would  in  turn  report  to  the 
Board  of  Revenue  at  Peking. 

Having  completed  the  work  of  the  district  and  put  into 
effect  the  new  scheme  in  that  district,  the  ten  officials  who 
were  associated  with  the  magistrate  in  inaugurating  the  sys- 
tem would  each  then  be  despatched  to  another  district  of  the 
prefecture,  and  there,  assisted  by  a  new  set  of  ten  men,  would 
carry  out  the  scheme  in  the  same  manner  as  was  done  in 
the  first  district.  Thus,  by  this  process  of  geometrical  pro- 
gression, at  the  end  of  the  first  year  the  new  system  would 
be  put  into  effect  in  one  province,  in  two  years  in  six  prov- 
inces, and  by  the  end  of  the  third  year  in  the  eighteen 
provinces. 

This,  then,  is  the  gist  of  Sir  Robert  Hart's  plan  for  the 
reform  of  the  land  tax.  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  point  out 
the  superficiality  and  impracticability  of  his  proposal.  Per- 
haps the  most  obvious  difficulty  of  his  scheme  is  the  uni- 
form rate  of  two  hundred  cash  that  he  proposed  to  im- 
pose on  all  lands.  Two  hundred  cash  as  an  average  rate 
of  the  land  tax  paid  per  mow  is  well  within  the  mark. 
But  to  impose  this  average  rate  on  all  lands  without  dis- 
crimination would  be  most  unjust.  Yet  this  is  just  what 
he  proposed  to  do,  for  the  landowner,  he  said,  should 
personally  appear  "  at  the  said  yamen  at  the  beginning  of 
the  loth  moon  each  year,  and  there,  according  to  the  num- 
ber of  mow,  set  down  in  the  said  document  or  order  pay 
land  taxes  at  the  rate  of  two  hundred  cash  per  mow"  1 
His  fundamental  difficulty  arose  from  the  fact  that  he  pro- 
posed to  reform  the  system  without  the  aid  of  an  "  assess- 

1  Vide  North  China  Herald,  p.  178. 


417]  THE  LAND  TAX  REFORM  149 

ment "  or  valuation  of  the  land.  Furthermore,  he  did  not 
provide  any  machinery  for  collection  and  administration. 
He  wanted  the  taxpayer  to  appear  personally  before  the 
district  magistrate,  report  the  amount  of  his  land  and  pay 
his  taxes,  which  procedure  of  course  is  an  absurdity  when 
one  remembers  that  the  size  of  a  district  in  China  is  some- 
times as  large  as  a  French  department  or  an  English  admin- 
istrative country. 

Hart's  memorandum  was  not,  however,  entirely  devoid 
of  value.  His  estimate  of  the  possible  yield  of  the  land  tax 
is  not  as  unreasonable  as  it  might  seem.  The  estimate  of 
the  taxable  area  is  probably  too  high,  but  his  average  of  two 
hundred  cash  per  mow  as  the  rate  actually  paid  by  the  land- 
owners in  China  is  really  conservative,  as  will  presently 
appear.  Furthermore,  if  the  Memorandum  made  no  con- 
tribution toward  the  practical  solution  of  the  problem,  it  did 
some  service  in  calling  the  attention  of  the  Chinese  govern- 
ment to  the  possibilities  of  the  land  tax  as  a  source  of 
revenue. 

The  estimate  of  Sir  Robert  on  the  possible  yield  of  the 
land  tax  is  corroborated  by  another  estimate  which  seems 
to  be  based  on  more  definite  and  tangible  facts.  This  is  the 
estimate  of  Sir  George  Jamieson,1  who  was  once  connected 
with  the  Peking  Syndicate  in  building  a  railway  in  the  pro- 
vince of  Honan.  The  Syndicate  bought,  in  1902,  9,216  mow 
of  land  in  seven  different  districts  of  the  province  from 

1  Jamieson  was  formerly  the  British  Consul-General  at  Shanghai 
and  President  of  the  North  China  Branch  of  the  Royal  Asiatic  As- 
sociation. He  has  made  some  first  hand  studies  on  the  financial  sys- 
tem, especially  the  land  tax  of  China.  We  have  already  referred  to 
his  report  on  "  The  Revenue  and  Expenditure  of  the  Chinese  Empire " 
and  his  work  on  "  Tenure  of  'Land  in  China  and  the  Condition  of  the 
Rural  Population"  (cf.  infra,  p.  78).  His  estimate  of  the  yield  of  the 
land  tax  in  China  is  embodied  in  his  report  on  "  Land  Taxation  in  the 
Province  of  Honan "  published  in  the  Diplomatic  and  Consular  Re- 
ports, Miscellaneous  Series  (1905),  no.  641. 


150  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA 

some  six  thousand  individual  proprietors.  The  Syndicate 
acquired  these  mow  of  land  as  an  ordinary  proprietor  and 
was  hence  subject  to  the  same  taxation  and  incidents  as 
the  Chinese  landowners.  The  number  of  mow  acquired  in 
each  of  the  seven  districts,  the  amount  of  tax  paid  and 
the  average  per  mow  are  shown  as  follows : x 

Annual  Taxes  in  Average  per 

District  Number  of  Mow  Bought          Kuping  Taels  Mow  in  K.  Taels 

Hsun  Hsien  1586  146  0.09 

Hwa  Hsien  169  11.83  0.07 

Chi  Hsien  1708  323.19  0.18 

Hsin  Hsiang  1317  283.28  0.215 

Hwa  Chia  915  185.62  0.202 

Hsiu  Wu  2914  698.38  0.248 

Ho  Nei  Hsien  616  86.58  0.140 

Total  9216  1734.85  0.1882 

The  average  tax  per  mow  for  the  seven  districts  is  then 
Tl.  0.1882.  Having  shown  that  some  of  these  seven  dis- 
tricts are  in  the  poor  and  sandy  portion  while  the  others 
are  in  the  better  section  of  the  province,  and  that  on  the 
whole  they  may  be  taken  as  representative  of  the  province 
as  a  whole,  Mr.  jamieson  then  proceeds  to  apply  this  rate  to 
the  entire  province  and  calculates  the  amount  that  the  land 
tax  of  the  province  should  yield.  The  area  of  Honan  is 
about  60,000  square  miles.  Assuming  that  two-thirds  of 
this  is  under  cultivation,  the  taxable  area  would  be  over 
25,000,000  acres,  or  150,000,000  mow.  According  to  the 
Ta  Tsing  Hwei  Tien,  Mr.  Jamieson  shows  that  the  area 
actually  registered  as  cultivated  is  given  as  63,986,185  mow. 
This  figure  is,  however,  antiquated,  being  based  on  the  re- 
turns of  the  eighteenth  year  of  Chia-ching  (1812)  and  the 
amount  is  likely  to  have  increased  since  and  may  be  approx- 
imately 1 50,000,000  mow.  "  But  taking  it  on  the  Chia-ching 
returns  and  assuming  that  the  tax  levied  on  land  held  by 

1 "  Land  Taxation  in  the  Province  of  Honan,"  op.  cit.,  p.  4. 


THE  LAND  TAX  REFORM  151 

the  syndicate  is  a  fair  average  for  the  whole  province,  the 
yield  of  the  land  tax  for  the  whole  province  should  be  Tls. 
12,042,200.  Or  if  we  suppose,  as  seems  more  probable, 
that  approximately  150,000,000  mow  pay  taxes,  the  sum 
levied  from  the  people  would  be  well  over  Tls.  28,000,000, 
a  sum  which  is  not  very  far  short  of  what  was  then  returned 
for  the  whole  Empire  of  China."  * 

The  average  return  of  the  tax  for  the  province  reported 
to  the  central  government  for  the  two  years  under  discus- 
sion, namely  1903  and  1904,  is  less  than  Tls.  3,000,000. 
In  accounting  for  this  difference,  we  may  again  quote 
Mr.  Jamieson :  "  It  will  thus  be  seen  that  out  of  the  Tls.  12,- 
000,000  odd  which  I  reckon  the  provincial  authorities  must 
collect  as  a  minimum  by  way  of  the  land  taxes,  they  return 
only  Tls.  2,860,000  as  actually  received,  leaving  Tls.  9,000,- 
ooo  odd  in  their  hands  somewhere.  A  certain  amount  of 
this,  no  doubt,  is  legitimately  required  to  carry  on  the  work 
of  the  government,  for  the  provincial  budget  only  provides 
for  Tls.  1,678,000,  a  sum  which  is  manifestly  inadequate 
to  administer  properly  a  province  (almost  a  kingdom)  of 
60,000  square  miles  with  a  population  of  some  22,000,000 
inhabitants.  Still,  making  every  allowance,  it  is  manifest 
there  is  a  wastage."  2 

Having  estimated  the  rate  for  the  province  and  its  prob- 
able yield,  Mr.  Jamieson  then  proceeds  to  apply  the  figures 
to  the  whole  country.  He  shows  that  as  a  basis  of  calcu- 
lation the  province  of  Honan  may  be  taken  as  a  very  fair 
standard  for  the  whole  empire.  There  are  many  places,  no 
doubt,  he  points  out,  poorer,  but  on  the  other  hand,  there 
are  unquestionably  vast  tracts  in  the  country  of  far  greater 
productive  capacity.  In  point  of  fertility  Honan  can  not 
be  compared,  for  example,  with  the  producing  plains  of 

1  Op.  cit.,  p.  8.  2  Ibid.,  p.  10. 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [420 

the  lower  Yangtze  or  the  Canton  delta.  The  principal 
crop  of  the  part  traversed  by  the  railway  is  the  tall  millet, 
or  kaoliang,  which  is  very  common  in  North  China,  and 
there  is  the  spring  crop  of  wheat  or  barley  which  is 
equally  common,  but  of  rice,  which  is  the  crop  par  ex- 
cellence of  the  Yangtze  and  the  southern  districts,  there 
is  practically  none.  Honan,  in  all  probability,  is  also  in- 
ferior to  Hupeh,  Hunan  and  many  parts  of  Szechuan. 
Nor  is  Honan  particularly  populous  or  prosperous  in  com- 
parison with  the  other  provinces.  Therefore,  if  we  should 
err,  he  urges,  in  taking  Honan  as  a  standard  for  the  eighteen 
provinces,  our  error  would  be  on  the  safe  side. 

Now  the  area  of  the  eighteen  provinces  is  approximately 
1,300,000  square  miles,  of  which  the  nine  eastern  provinces 
are  situated  on  or  near  the  great  plains  of  China.  These 
nine  provinces  contain  no  less  than  500,000  square  miles, 
the  greater  part  of  which  is  a  cultivated  soil  of  the  highest 
fertility.  Mr.  Jamieson  maintains  that  half  of  the  total 
area  may  be  taken  as  cultivated  and  capable  of  bearing  good 
crops,  or  650,000  square  miles,  which  is  equivalent,  in  round 
numbers,  to  400,000,000  acres  or,  at  six  mow  to  the  acre, 
2,400,000  mow.  If  the  average  rate  of  Tls.  o.  1882  per  mow 
holds  good  for  the  whole  country,  the  amount  of  the  land 
tax  levied  upon  the  people  would  amount  to  Tls.  451,000,- 
ooo  which,  he  says,  is  by  no  means  a  formidable  sum  when 
one  remembers  the  size  of  population  and  the  extent  of  the 
area  of  China.1 

The  difference  between  these  two  estimates  lies,  in  the 
first  place,  in  the  rate  of  the  tax.  Sir  Robert  Hart  assumed 
that  the  average  rate  would  be  two  hundred  cash  to  the  mow. 
or,  at  the  rate  of  exchange  of  two  thousand  cash  to  the  tael, 
Tl.  o.io.  On  the  other  hand,  Jamieson's  estimated  average 
rate  of  the  tax  paid  is  Tl.  0.1882  per  mow,  or  nearly  twice  as 

llbid.,  p.  12. 


42 1  ]  THE  LAND  TAX  REFORM  153 

much  as  Hart's  rate.  Jamieson's  rate,  as  we  have  seen,  is 
based  on  actual  rates  paid,  and  is  therefore  likely  to  be 
nearer  to  the  truth. 

Moreover,  we  find  in  the  statute  that  the  legal  rate  in 
money  varies  all  the  way  from  a  small  fraction  of  a  tael  to 
seven-tenths  of  a  tael  per  mow.  The  rate  for  the  great 
majority  of  cases,  as  pointed  out  by  a  Chinese  authority  on 
the  subject,  is  about  one-tenth  of  a  tael  per  mow.1  To  this 
money  rate  must  be  added  the  rate  in  produce  which,  vary- 
ing from  a  small  fraction  of  one  tou  to  several  tou  of  grain, 
is  imposed  on  practically  all  lands  in  addition  to  the  rate  in 
money.  Furthermore,  it  must  be  remembered  that  these 
rates  are  the  original  legal  rates  based  on  the  assessment  of 
more  than  two  hundred  years  ago,  which,  as  we  have 
already  shown,  represent  only  a  part  of  what  is  to-day 
actually  collected  from  the  people.  The  rate  actually  ap- 
plied amounts  in  some  districts  to  several  times  the  original 
rate  and  in  most  cases  to  two  or  three  times  as  much.2 
From  these  facts  we  are  inclined  to  accept  Jamieson's  aver- 
age rate  as  a  fair  average  for  the  whole  country. 

The  second  question,  then,  is  whether  these  two  esti- 
mates of  the  taxable  area  of  China  can  in  any  way  be  ac- 
cepted. It  is  to  be  observed  that  both  of  the  estimates 
assume  that  half  of  the  total  area  of  China  may  be  taken 
as  cultivated,  and  hence  taxable.  We  shall  inquire  pres- 
ently whether  such  an  assumption  can  be  upheld.  But 
before  entering  into  that  inquiry  the  discrepancy  between 
the  two  estimates  in  regard  to  the  total  area  of  the  country 

1  Chang  Lian  Chia,   Studies  on   Taxation   System  in   the  Principal 
Countries  of  the  World,  pp.  23-24. 

2  Take  Szechuan,  for  example.    Mr.  E.  H.  Parker  in  his  treatise  on 
"  The  Financial  Capacity  of  the  Chinese,"  Journal  of  the  Asiatic  Asso- 
ciation, vol.  xxx,  1896,  said :  "  I  spent  a  year  in  that  province  and  found 
that  the  customary  ratings,  allowances,  etc.,  practically  made  the  land 
tax  in  some  districts  ten  times  its  nominal  charge"  (p.  83). 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [422 

should  be  noted.  It  is  rather  surprising  that  a  discrepancy 
should  exist  on  this  point  rather  than  on  the  assumption  of 
the  proportion  between  the  total  and  the  cultivated  area. 
Upon  inquiry  we  find  that  neither  of  the  calculations  is 
quite  correct  in  regard  to  the  total  area  of  the  eighteen 
provinces.  Sir  Robert  Hart  based  his  calculation  on  the 
assumption  that  the  dimensions  of  China  are  four  thousand 
/*  square.  These  figures  are  found  in  the  Chinese  records, 
but  in  the  light  of  modern  measurement  they  are  rather 
crude  data  to  be  depended  upon.  As  it  turns  out,  his  esti- 
mate of  the  total  area  of  'China  Proper  is  much  too  high. 
On  the  other  hand,  Sir  George  Jamieson's  calculation  is  too 
low,  for  he  took  the  area  of  the  country  to  be  1,300,000 
square  miles  while  we  know  that  the  area  of  the  eighteen 
provinces  is  1,501,000  square  miles  and  of  the  Manchurian 
provinces  360,000  square  miles.  The  actual  area  of  the 
eighteen  provinces  therefore  is  960,000,000  acres,  or 
5,760,000  mow  (taking  six  mow  to  the  acre),  instead  of 
the  8,000,000,000  mow  of  Hart's,  or  4,800,000,000  mow  of 
Jamieson's  estimate. 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  their  estimate  that  half  of  the 
total  area  of  China  may  be  taken  as  cultivated  cannot  be  far 
from  the  truth.  The  cultivated  area  in  China  certainly  can- 
not be  less  than  one-third,  if  it  is  not  one-half  of  the 
total  area.  If  we  take  it  at  one-third  we  shall  be  well 
within  the  truth.  One-third  of  the  total  area  of  China 
Proper  would  be  320,000,000  acres  or  1,920,000,000  mow. 
We  can  be  almost  absolutely  certain  that  the  cultivated,  and 
hence  taxable,  area  of  China  cannot  be  less  than  one-third 
of  her  total  area ;  for,  in  the  first  place,  we  know  that  out  of 
a  total  area  of  618,927,145  acres  of  British  India  224,- 
165,602  acres  were  cropped.1  This  does  not  include  the 
45,539,070  acres  which  are  made  arable  through  the  help 

1  Vide  Statistical  Abstracts  relating  to  British  India,  1916,  p.  128. 


423]  THE  LAND  TAX  REFORM  155 

of  irrigation,  the  82,400,281  acres  which  are  covered  with 
forest,  and  the  48,760,388  acres  which  are  in  fallow.1  In 
other  words,  in  British  India,  which  is  approximately  two- 
thirds  as  large  as  the  eighteen  provinces  of  China,  one-half 
of  the  land  is  cultivated  and  more  than  two-fifths,  exclusive 
of  the  forest  land,  is  cropped.  In  fertility,  the  soil  of  the 
eighteen  provinces  certainly  compares  very  favorably  with 
that  of  British  India.  Both  of  the  countries  are  also 
similar,  as  a  whole,  in  their  economic  development.  We 
have,  therefore,  every  reason  to  believe  that  the  proportion 
between  the  total  and  the  cultivated  area  in  China  should  be 
about  the  same  as  that  of  British  India. 

In  the  second  place,  the  estimate  is  supported  by  histor- 
ical data.  From  the  earliest  time  China  has  been  gathering 
statistics  on  population  and  cultivated  area,  the  two  sets  of 
figures  which  interest  the  statesmen  of  all  ages.2  In  some 
dynasties  these  statistics  were  collected  more  regularly  than 
in  others;  but  on  the  whole  they  have  been  accepted 
by  modern  authorities  as  reliable.3  According  to  these 
figures  the  area  reported  as  cultivated  in  Sui  dynasty 
amounts  to  1,940,942,079  mow,  in  Tang  dynasty  1,430,- 
386,300  mow,  and  in  Yuan  dynasty  to  1,900,000,000 
mow.4  The  population  in  China  during  these  dynasties 

lThe  area  of  British  India  is  1,093,074  square  miles,  or  618,927,145 
acres;  and  the  population,  according  to  the  source  quoted  above,  is  in 
round  numbers  240,000,000.  In  other  words,  in  area  as  well  as  in 
population  British  India  is  just  about  two-thirds  of  China  Proper. 

2  The    statistical   figures    collected   before    1295    may   be    found   in 
Tung  Kao,  bks.  i-vii,  passim  ("On  the  Land  Tax")   and  bks.  viii-xi 
("On  Population")   and  those  collected  after  that  date  in  The  Con- 
tinuation of  Tung  Kao,  bks.  i-ix  and  bks.  xii-xiv. 

3  Cf.  James  W.  Bashford,  China,  An  Interpretation,  pp.  503-506. 

4  Cf.  Finance  of  the  Republic,  vol.  i,  pp.  235-236.    The  figures  of  Ming 
dynasty  show  a  great  drop,  due  undoubtedly  to  no  other  reason  than 
that  of  administration.    The  area  cultivated  as  reported  in  Ming  dynasty 
was  850,762,300  mow. 


I56  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [424 

was  less  than  fifty  millions.1  If,  when  the  population 
of  the  country  was  less  than  fifty  millions,  the  amount 
of  land  cultivated  was  over  1,900,000,000  mow,  how 
can  the  amount  of  the  latter  be  less  when  the  population 
has  grown  to  over  350,000,000?  When  the  Manchu  dynasty 
came  to  power  the  amount  reported  cultivated  was  about 
5,000,000  mow.  This  was  undoubtedly  due  to  the  unsettled 
condition  of  the  country,  and  to  the  looseness  with  which  the 
new  government  enforced  the  collection  of  taxes.  This  figure 
increased  to  about  7,000,000  in  the  reign  of  Chien-Lung 
(1736-1796)  and  to  about  9,000,000  in  the  thirteenth  year 
of  Tung^Chi  (1875),  which  remained  practically  constant 
to  the  last  day  of  the  dynasty.  In  the  meantime  the  popu- 
lation of  China  during  the  Tsing  dynasty  had  increased 
from  about  50,000,000  at  the  beginning  of  the  dynasty  to 
over  400,000,000  in  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century.2 
The  reason  for  the  differences  between  these  two  sets  of 
figures  is  obvious,  for  during  the  Tsing  dynasty  the  poll 
tax  was  amalgamated  with  the  land  tax,  and  hence  the 
local  official  had  no  reason  for  not  reporting  the  true  figure 
of  the  population,  while  he  had  every  inducement  for  under- 
reporting the  cultivated  area  on  which  the  amount  of  taxes 
to  be  returned  from  his  district  was  based.  That  the  amount 
of  cultivated  area  as  reported  in  the  Tsing  dynasty  was 
nothing  but  nominal  is  evident.  Our  estimate  that  the  tax- 
able area  in  China  should  be  at  least  1,900,000,000  mow  is 
very  conservative.  The  probability  is  that  the  taxable  land 
in  China  is  much  more  than  that  amount. 

Taking  the  taxable  area  of  China,  then,  at  1,900,000,000 
mow,  and  the  average  rate  of  the  tax  at  Tl.  0.15  per  mow, 
(instead  of  Tls.  Tl.  0.1882)  the  yield  of  the  land  tax  for 
the  eighteen  provinces  should  amount  to  Tls.  288,000,- 

1  Cf.  Werner,  Descriptive  Sociology  of  the  Chinese,  pp.  39-50. 

2  Cf.  supra,  p.  101. 


425]  THE  LAND  TAX  REFORM  157 

ocx).  Here  again  we  can  check  up  our  estimate  by  com- 
paring it  with  the  result  of  the  tax  as  worked  out  in 
India.  For  the  year  1913-1914  the  yield  of  the  Land 
Revenue  of  British  India,  excluding  the  returns  of  the 
forest  land,  was  about  £23, 000,000.  *  At  the  rate  of 
exchange  for  the  same  period,  which  was  approximately 
the  average  rate  for  the  last  ten  or  fifteen  years,2  this  is 
equivalent  to  about  165,000,000  Kuping  taels.  In  the  total 
area,  as  well  as  in  the  cultivated  area,  China,  as  we  have 
already  seen,  may  be  taken  as  one  and  one-half  larger  than 
India.  The  yield  of  tax  according  to  this  basis  would 
amount  to  250,000,000  Kuping  taels.*  Yet  the  actual  "  esti- 
mated "  yield  of  the  land  tax  for  the  year  1915  was  only 
$65,000,000,  or  approximately  Tls.  45,000,000,  less  than 
one-fifth  of  what  it  might  and  should  yield.  From  this 
calculation  and  comparison  we  are  constrained  to  con- 
clude that  China  is  far  from  being  near  a  state  of  bank- 
ruptcy and  that  in  spite  of  the  absorption  of  a  large  part  of 
her  revenues  by  foreign  loans  and  war  indemnities  her  finan- 
cial position  can  be  put  on  a  sound  basis  by  a  proper  re- 
organization of  her  system  of  taxation. 

In  this  connection  it  may  be  observed  that  according  to 
Mr.  Wagel,  the  only  foreign  writer  on  the  finance  of  China 
who  takes  a  different  position  in  regard  to  this  subject,  the 
cultivated  land  in  China  cannot  be  more  than  1,200,000,000 
mow  and  the  revenue  on  land  cannot  exceed  Tls.  75,000,- 
ooo.  *  He  maintains  that  the  estimates  of  Mr.  Jamieson 
and  Mr.  Hart  could  not  be  anywhere  near  the  truth.  It  is 

1  Statistical  Abstracts,  op.  cit.,  p.  54. 

2  China  Year  Book,  1916,  p.  358. 

*  Chang  Lian  Chia  in  his  Studies,  op.  cit.  arrived  at  the  same  figure, 
although  his  conclusion  was  based  on  a  different  process  of  estimation. 
Cf.  also  The  National  Review,  Shanghai,  which  estimated  that  the  an- 
nual yield  of  the  tax  should  amount  to  at  least  Tls.  200,000,000  (Feb. 
6,  1915). 

4  See  Wagel,  S.  ,R.,  Finance  of  China,  pp.  363-374. 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [426 

true,  as  we  have  already  seen,  that  both  of  the  estimates  of 
the  yield  of  the  tax  are  much  too  high.  But,  on  the  other 
hand,  Mr.  Wagel  errs  in  the  other  extreme.  His  method  of 
calculation  has  no  justifiable  basis.  "  A  farmer/'  he  says, 
"  generally  supports  a  family  of  five  or  six ;  at  a  rough 
computation  the  landowners  in  this  country  (China),  leav- 
ing apart  the  laborers  and  the  dwellers  in  cities,  may  be 
estimated  at  30,000,000 — on  the  basis  of  a  population  of 
slightly  over  300,000,000.  .  .  .  One  cannot  go  far  wrong  in 
giving  an  average  of  40  mow,  which  I  consider  large,  to 
each  holder.  On  that  basis  the  total  area  of  cultivated  land 
will  be  1,200,000,000  or  about  200,000,000  acres."  *  Such 
an  estimate  is,  of  course,  nothing  but  the  roughest  of  guess- 
work. He  further  fails  to  distinguish  between  India  and 
that  part  of  his  country  which  is  under  British  administra- 
tion and  known  as  British  India,  and  that  accounts  for  his 
serious  mistake  in  taking  the  area  of  China  Proper  as 
smaller  than  British  India.  "  In  a  well-organized  and  well- 
governed  country  like  India,"  says  he,  "  which  has  an  area 
larger  than  that  of  China  Proper  ...  the  net  area  cropped 
in  1909  was  only  218,039,793  acres.  I  doubt  very  much  if 
a  larger  area  than  this  is  cultivated  or  cultivtable  in  this 
country."  2  What  he  quotes  here  as  the  "  net  area,"  as  we 
have  already  seen,  refers  to  British  India,  which,  as  has 
been  pointed  out,  is  only  two-thirds  the  area  of  China.  He 
does  not  even  think  that  there  are  as  many  as  218,000,000 
cultivable  acres  in  China,  while  we  know  that  there  are 
about  two  and  a  half  times  as  many  acres  cultivable  as  in 
British  India,  whose  area  of  cultivation  is  smaller  than  that 
of  China.  Mr.  Wagel's  objection  to  the  possibility  of  in- 
creasing the  returns  of  land  tax  through  a  proper  reorgani- 
zation is  therefore  not. valid. 

It  seems  hardly  necessary  for  us  to  state  that  in  estimat- 

1  Finance  of  China,  op.  cit.,  pp.  364-5.  *  Ibid.,  p.  364. 


427]  THE  LAND  TAX  REFORM  159 

ing  the  possible  yield  of  the  tax  no  claim  is  made  that  the 
estimated  amount  could  be  realized  all  at  once.  The  land 
tax  is  a  very  costly  and  laborious  tax  to  administer.  As 
the  data  for  a  scientific  valuation  and  assessment  are  prac- 
tically non-existent  in  China,  and  the  old  machinery  of  col- 
lection is  sadly  defective,  it  undoubtedly  will  take  China 
many  years  to  put  the  system  on  a  scientific  and  efficient 
basis.  But  the  large  financial  returns  which  would  accrue 
should  be  a  strong  inducement  to  the  government  to  effect 
an  early  reform  of  the  system. 

To  those  who  are  not  familiar  with  the  conditions  in 
China  our  conclusions  that  the  tax  can  be  increased  sev- 
eral times  without  imposing  a  greater  burden  upon  the 
people  may  seem  somewhat  startling.  Such  results, 
however,  have  actually  been  obtained.  The  salt  gabelle  in 
China  in  1913,  before  its  reorganization,  yielded  about 
$17,000,000,  which  was  about  the  average  return  for  the 
preceding  twenty  years.  But  in  1916,  three  years  after  its 
reorganization,  its  yield  amounted  to  no  less  than  $71,000,- 
ooo,  or  more  than  fourfold  its  return  for  191 3. x  Before  its 
reorganization  the  system  of  the  salt  gabelle  was  in  practi- 
cally the  same  situation  as  the  land  tax.  Its  administration 
was  most  inefficient.  The  rate  of  the  tax  varied  all  the  way 
from  $0.65  per  100  catties  of  salt  in  the  three  eastern  prov- 
inces to  $5.09  for  the  same  amount  in  Ao-yan  of  Huai-nan. 
There  were  evasions,  double  taxation  and  other  violations 
of  the  principles  of  taxation.  The  system  was  undoubtedly 
in  as  bad  a  condition  as  the  present  land  tax.  Yet  by  a 
proper  reorganization  of  the  system  of  collection  and  ad- 
ministration, by  eliminating  the  practices  of  corruption  and 
smuggling,  the  returns  of  the  tax  have  been  increased  four- 
fold in  three  years.  The  results  of  the  reorganization  of 
the  salt  tax  should  open  the  eyes  of  the  Chinese  government 
to  the  possibilities  of  the  land  tax. 

1  Far  Eastern  Review,  vol.  xiii,  p.  267. 


CHAPTER  XII 

THE  LAND  TAX  REFORM 
(Continued) 

IN  the  preceding  chapters  we  have  traced  the  development 
of  the  tax,  analyzed  its  existing  conditions  and  demonstrated 
the  possibilities  of  its  reform.  The  reform  movement,  as 
has  been  pointed  out,  began  many  years  before  the  fall  of 
the  Tsing  dynasty.  But  on  account  of  the  inefficiency  and 
the  laissez-faire  policy  of  this  period  nothing  worth  not- 
ing was  done.  After  the  establishment  of  the  Republic 
the  movement  was  revived.  But  most  of  these  reforms 
were  unfortunately  interrupted  by  the  political  vicissitudes 
of  the  country.  This  chapter  attempts  to  review,  briefly, 
some  of  the  important  improvements  that  have  been  intro- 
duced since  the  Republic,  and  to  discuss  in  closing  some 
of  the  fundamental  problems  which  must  be  solved  before 
any  thoroughgoing  reforms  can  be  effected. 

One  of  the  most  obvious  improvements  introduced  by 
the  Republic  was  that  which  consolidated  into  one  single 
payment  all  the  various  levies  which  had  been  added  to  the 
original  tax  in  the  course  of  the  last  dynasty.  In  the 
analysis  of  the  nature  of  the  tax  it  was  shown  that  during 
the  Tsing  dynasty  the  tax  was  assessed  almost  invariably 
in  two  parts,  one  in  silver  and  the  other  in  produce  which 
may  be  of  more  than  one  kind,  and  that  in  the  course  of 
time  various  levies  under  all  sorts  of  ingenious  names  were 
added  to  the  original  assessments.  In  Kuangtung  Province, 
for  example,  for  every  ta-el  of  the  tax,  as  assessed  in  1713, 
160  [428 


THE  LAND  TAX  REFORM  l6l 

there  were  added  during  the  Tsing  dynasty  a  "  wastage 
charge"  of  Tl.  0.169,  a"  meltage  charge"  of  Tl.  0.30,  a 
"  provision  contribution  "  of  Tl.  0.30  and  a  "  miscellaneous 
fee"  of  Tl.  0.574,  making  a  total  of  TL  2.334  for  every 
tael.  Similar  charges  were  added  to  the  assessment  in 
grain.  These  various  levies  have  been  consolidated  into 
one  single  payment  in  most  of  the  provinces,  and  converted 
into  dollars  or  copper  cents  which  are  the  common  daily 
currency  of  the  people  at  rates  established  by  the  govern- 
ment.1 The  taxpayers  were  thus  saved  much  of  the  uncer- 
tainty and  many  of  the  vexatious  exactions  of  the  collectors 
of  the  old  regime. 

Along  with  the  consolidation  of  the  levies  and  the  pro- 
hibition of  the  illegal  charges  on  the  part  of  the  collectors, 
provisions  were  also  made  for  the  expenses  of  collection 
from  the  receipts  of  the  tax.  During  the  Tsing  dynasty 
no  provisions  whatsoever,  as  has,  been  shown,  were  made 
for  the  maintenance  of  the  tax-collectors  and  the  local 
officials  who  were  thus  obliged  to  exact  all  sorts  of  extra 
charges  from  the  people.  In  the  third  year  of  the  Republic 
provisions  were  made  allowing  ten  per  cent  of  the  total 
receipts  to  the  provincial  and  local  authorities  as  the  ex- 
penses of  collection.  In  the  following  year  on  account  of 
the  financial  stringencies  of  the  government  this  allowance 
was  withdrawn,  but  the  local  authorities  were,  then,  al- 
lowed to  add  ten  per  cent  to  the  tax  rate  to  cover  the  ex- 
penses of  collection.2  At  the  same  time  laws  were  passed 
allowing  the  provincial  authorities  to  add  a  rate  to  the 
national  rate  for  the  provincial  expenditure.  This  rate 
varies  in  different  provinces  from  ten  to  thirty  per  cent. 
It  is  not  to  be  understood,  however,  that  these  rates  for  the 

1  Cf.  Finances  of  the  Republic,  vol.  i,  pp.  274-279,  and  also  the  Report 
of  the  Ministry  of  Finance  for  the  4th  Year  of  the  Republic,  p.  10. 
f  Finances  of  the  Republic,  vol.  i,  pp.  267-279. 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [430 

expenses  of  collection  and  the  maintenance  of  the  local 
government  represent  increases  over  the  actual  amounts 
formerly  collected.  They  merely  represent  what  were 
formerly  collected  without  the  sanction  of  the  central  gov- 
ernment. 

A  third  important  and  interesting  feature  of  tax  reform 
introduced  by  the  Republic  was  the  confirmation  of  the 
title-deeds  to  land.  During  the  Tsing  dynasty,  as  has  been 
mentioned,  every  transfer  of  landed  property  by  absolute 
or  irrevocable  sale x  was  subject  to  a  tax  of  three  per  cent 
of  the  face  value  of  the  sale.  This  rate,  however,  was  only 
the  nominal  legal  rate.  In  practice  by  virtue  of  the  various 
extra  charges  it  amounted  in  some  cases  to  several  times 
the  legal  rate.  The  result  was  that  the  tax  was  invariably 
evaded,  either  in  whole  or  in  part.  In  the  third  year  of 
Hsuan-Tung  (1909)  a  new  law  was  passed  providing  that 
•the  tax  of  registration  of  transfer  of  land  was  to  be  nine 
per  cent  on  irrevocable  sale  and  six  per  cent  on  mortgages 
or  revocable  sale  of  more  than  ten  years  duration.2  Out- 
side of  these  rates  the  officials  were  prohibited  from  collect- 
ing any  extra  charges.  But  these  rates  were  also  prohibitory ; 
and  evasion,  either  total  or  partial,  continued  to  exist.  After 
the  establishment  of  the  Republic  these  rates  were  lowered 
from  nine  per  cent  on  sale  to  four  per  cent  and  from  six 
per  cent  on  mortgages  to  two  per  cent.  The  tax  is  payable 
by  the  vendor  or  mortgagor  of  the  property,  as  the  case 
may  be,  within  six  months  after  the  transaction.  In  case 
of  transfer  by  sale  the  law  gives  the  government  right  to 
purchase  the  property  at  the  face  value  of  the  sale  if  it  feels 
that  the  sale  value  is  understated.3 

1  Cf.  supra,  p.  75- 

*Cf.  Report  of  the  Ministry  of  Finance,  pp.  16-17. 

1  Cf.  Report  of  the  Ministry  of  Finance,  p.  15. 


43I]  THE  LAND  TAX  REFORM  163 

At  the  same  time  in  the  second  year  of  the  Republic  a 
law  was  passed  requiring  that  title-deeds  on  land  which  had 
been  executed  before  the  last  day  of  the  second  year  of  the 
Republic  should  be  registered  and  confirmed  by  the  govern- 
ment.1 A  registration  fee  of  ten  cents  was  charged  on  all 
deeds  and  a  tax  of  one  dollar  on  all  deeds  whose  face  value 
exceeded  thirty  dollars.  The  success  of  this  law  as  a  fiscal 
measure  was  most  remarkable.  In  the  third  and  the  fourth 
years  of  the  Republic  during  which  the  law  was  in  effect 
the  receipts  amounted  to  nearly  forty-nine  million  dollars.2 

A  fourth  and  more  fundamental  attempt  at  the  reform  of 
the  land  tax  introduced  by  the  Republic  was  the  creation  of 
the  Bureau  of  Land  Measurement  in  the  third  year  of  the 
Republic  or  end  of  1914.  The  purpose  of  the  Bureau  was 
to  make  a  cadastral  survey  of  the  country.  As  a  preliminary 
measure  of  the  work  the  Bureau  published  a  book  on  Land 
Measurement  in  China  treating  the  development  of  the 
various  methods  of  measuring  and  taxing  land  in  China 
and  another  on  the  Principal  Facts  of  Land  Measurements 
in  Foreign  Countries  which  deals,  however,  chiefly  with 
the  land-tax  problems  of  Japan,  Formosa,  Korea,  Hindo- 
China,  Kowlan  and  Kwangtung.  Various  outlines  for 
surveying,  mapping  and  valuing  the  lands  were  also  drawn 
up.  According  to  these  outlines  the  basis  of  the  land  tax 
was  to  be  the  "  net  produce  "  for  arable  lands  and  "  net 
rent  "  for  urban  lands.  To  arrive  at  the  net  produce  or  net 
rent  as  the  case  might  be  a  certain  arbitrary  percentage  of 
deduction  from  the  gross  produce  or  contractual  rent  was  al- 
lowed. To  obtain  the  amount  of  net  produce  the  owner  of 
the  land  was  allowed  fifteen  per  cent  of  the  gross  produce  as 
expenses  of  cultivation,  five  per  cent  for  repairs  and  mainte- 

1  Cf.  Report  of  the  Ministry  of  Finance,  pp.  14-15. 
*  Ibid.,  p.  15.    For  a  detailed  account  of  the  operation  of  this  tax 
cf.  Finances  of  the  Republic,  vol.  1,  pp.  415-425. 


!64  THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [432 

nance  and  two  and  one-half  per  cent  for  taxes  and  other 
levies  on  land.1  In  the  case  of  rent  similar  percentages  were 
allowed.  These  percentages  were  of  course  merely  suggested 
by  the  Bureau  and  subject  to  change  and  readjustment. 

Recognizing  that  the  making  of  a  cadastre  would  take 
no  little  time,  provisions  were  at  the  same  time  made  by 
the  government  for  the  compilation  of  a  temporary  tax 
roll.  This  was  to  be  done  by  taking  the  district  or  hsien 
as  a  unit  and  dividing  it  into  from  thirty  to  fifty  sections. 
For  each  section  there  was  to  be  elected  an  elder  who,  as- 
sisted by  a  number  of  the  farmers  of  the  district  and  sur- 
veyors, was  to  compile  by  personal  investigation  a  list  of 
all  the  lands  within  the  section.  This  was  to  be  accom- 
plished in  sixty  days  and  after  the  completion  of  the  work 
this  elder  with  his  assistants  was  to  be  shifted  to  another 
section  to  check  up  the  work  that  had  been  done  for  that 
section,  for  which  thirty  more  days  were  allowed.  The 
district  magistrate  was  to  supervise  and  check  up  the  work 
of  the  sections  within  his  district,  and  submit  the  returns 
to  the  provincial  authorities  within  forty  days  after  the 
work  for  the  individual  sections  had  been  completed.  The 
list  was  to  contain  all  the  lands  in  the  district,  giving  for 
each  the  location,  the  name  of  the  owner,  the  produce  of 
the  land,  the  rent  paid,  if  any,  and  other  necessary  informa- 
tion. Had  this  been  done  some  immediate  reforms  could 
have  been  effected.  But,  unfortunately,  owing  to  financial 
and  other  difficulties  the  work  was  not  carried  through  and 
the  Bureau  of  Land  Measurement  was  also  suspended 
shortly  after  its  establishment. 

These,  then,  are  the  important  reforms,  or  rather  at- 
tempts at  reform,  introduced  since  the  Republic.  The  situa- 
tion, as  a  whole,  remains  substantially  the  same  as  it  was 

1  Finances  of  the  Republic,  vol.  i,  pp.  312-313. 


433]  THE  LAND  TAX  REFORM  165 

during  the  Manchu  regime.  The  system  is  antiquated  in 
principle  as  well  as  defective  in  administration.  Reform 
must  take  place  if  the  Chinese  government  is  to  put  its 
financial  system  on  a  sound  basis.  Indeed  the  reform  of 
the  land  tax  is  the  key-note  to  the  solution  of  the  financial 
difficulties  of  China.  The  land  tax,  as  has  already  been  de- 
monstrated in  the  preceding  chapter,  could  be  made  to  yield 
through  proper  reorganization  several  times  the  amount  of 
its  present  receipts  without  greatly  increasing  the  burden 
of  the  people. 

In  the  remaining  pages  a  few  of  the  fundamental  prob- 
lems of  reform  will  be  discussed. 

The  first  and  perhaps  the  most  important  problem  in  any 
system  of  land  tax  is  the  determination  of  the  base  of 
the  tax.  In  theory  the  present  land  tax  in  China  is  levied 
on  produce,  the  land  being  roughly  classified  according  to 
this  principle.  In  practice,  however,  the  system,  as  has 
already  been  seen,  is  in  a  most  chaotic  and  deplorable 
condition.  If  any  thorough-going  reform  is  to  be  effected, 
a  new  base  must,  first  of  all,  be  determined  upon.  A  tax 
on  land  may  be  based  either  on  the  produce  or  on  the  value 
of  the  land.  To  each  of  these  two  principles  there  are  two 
subdivisions.  A  tax  on  the  produce  of  the  land  may  be 
determined  according  to  either  its  gross  produce  or  its  net 
produce.  A  tax  on  the  value  of  the  land  may,  similarly,  be 
based  upon  either  the  value  of  the  land  singly  or  its  value 
including  improvements.  A  study  of  the  systems  of  land 
taxation  in  the  principal  countries  of  the  world  shows  that 
all  of  these  four  bases  are  still  used.  In  a  number  of  the 
German  states  the  tax  on  land  is  still  determined  according 
to  its  gross  produce.  In  France  the  impot  fancier  is  ap- 
portioned on  landed  property  in  proportion  to  its  "  net 
produce  ".  In  the  United  States  the  land  tax  which  is  in- 
cluded in  the  general  property  tax  is  based  on  the  selling 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [434 

value  of  the  land  including  improvements.  In  some  of  the 
newer  countries,  as  New  Zealand  and  Australia,  the  land 
tax  is  assessed  only  on  the  pure  value  of  the  land,  improve- 
ments being  exempted  from  taxation.  Which  of  these  four 
bases  of  value,  then,  shall  China  adopt? 

That  the  principle  of  taxing  the  produce  of  the  land 
without  paying  any  regard  to  the  expenses  of  cultivation 
is,  under  modern  conditions,  inequitable  is  apparent  and 
needs  no  discussion.  The  problem  therefore  reduces  itself 
to  the  proposition  whether  the  tax  shall  be  based  on  the  net 
produce  or  the  value  of  the  land,  putting  aside  for  the  pres- 
ent the  question  of  taxing  improvements.  Strictly  speaking, 
the  selling  value  of  the  land  is  nothing  but  a  capitalization 
of  its  net  produce  present  and  expectant.  For  purposes  of 
taxation  the  difference  between  the  two  types  of  base  is, 
however,  a  very  fundamental  one.  The  first  and,  perhaps, 
most  important  difference  between  taxing  a  piece  of  land 
according  to  its  produce  and  taxing  it  according  to  its  value 
lies  in  the  fact  that  under  the  former  principle  land  which 
does  not  yield  an  income,  however  valuable  it  may  be,  es- 
capes taxation.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the  tax  is  imposed 
on  the  selling  value,  all  lands  that  have  value,  whether  they 
be  put  into  a  productive  use  or  not,  are  subject  to  the  tax. 
A  tax  on  the  land  value  will,  thus,  tend  to  make  expensive 
the  holding  of  land  which  is  not  being  put  to  its  most  pro- 
ductive use. 

In  the  second  place,  a  tax  on  land  value,  as  pointed  out 
by  Professor  Willoughby  in  his  "  Memorandum  on  the  Re- 
form of  the  Land  Tax  System  in  China  ",  can  be  admin- 
istered with  relative  ease  and  economy.1  When  the  tax  is 
based  on  the  yield  or  produce  this  yield  has  to  be  deter- 
mined each  year.  On  the  other  hand  the  value  of  the  land 

1  The  Memorandum  can  be  found  in  the  Far  Eastern  Review,  vol. 
xiii,  nos.  6-8.    Vide  no.  6,  p.  214. 


435]  THE  LAND  TAX  REFORM  167 

is  comparatively  stable,  except  when  special  conditions 
violently  affect  the  value  of  the  lands  of  the  particular 
locality.  Such  effects  are  often  due  to  the  increase  of  popu- 
lation, the  construction  of  new  means  of  transportation 
and  other  causes  which  generally  affect  the  locality  as  a 
whole;  and  may  be  adjusted,  when  it  becomes  necessary, 
without  great  difficulty.  The  determination  of  the  selling 
value  in  China  where  land  is  frequently  bought  and  sold 
should  present  no  great  difficulties. 

There  is  a  third  advantage  resulting  from  the  adoption 
of  the  principle  of  taxing  selling  value.  It  is  a  well-known 
fact  that  in  China  most  of  the  urban  lands  used  for  building 
purposes  either  escape  taxation  entirely  or  are  greatly 
undertaxed.  This  is  to  be  explained,  at  least  partly,  by  the 
fact  that  under  the  earlier  dynasties  when  the  system  of 
land  distribution  was  in  existence  lands  in  the  towns  which 
were  used  for  building  purposes  and  hence  yielded  no  "pro- 
duce "  were  exempted  from  taxation.1  And  lands  which 
were  formerly  under  cultivation  but  have  been  converted 
into  lots  continue  to  pay  the  same  rate  of  taxation  as  before. 
The  injustice  of  this  arrangement  needs  no  discussion.  Since 
the  establishment  of  the  Republic  several  proposals  have 
been  made  to  remedy  the  situation  by  introducing  a  tax  on 
the  urban  land  based  either  on  its  rental  or  its  selling  value.2 
Between  the  two  principles,  that  of  selling  value  is  to  be 
preferred.  The  experience  of  the  other  countries,  especially 
of  England,  Australia  and  Germany,  has  clearly  demon- 
strated the  defects  of  taxing  land  according  to  its  rental 
value.3  Some  of  these  defects  perhaps  may  not  occur  in  a 
country  like  China.  But  on  the  other  hand,  China  is  now 
on  the  eve  of  an  industrial  transformation,  and  those  prob- 

lCf.  Finance  of  the  Republic,  vol.  i,  pp.  400-401. 

*Cf.  ibid.,  pp.  401-402. 

8  Vide  'Seligman,  Essays  in  Taxation,  8th  ed.,  p.  539. 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [436 

lems  which  have  arisen  in  the  countries  more  advanced  in- 
dustrially, such  as  congestion  of  population  in  towns,  land 
speculation,  etc.,  are  bound  to  arise  in  China  as  elsewhere, 
and  in  instituting  a  system  China  may  as  well  profit  by  the 
experience  of  other  countries. 

It  may  be  objected,  however,  that,  as  the  existing  system 
of  taxation  is  based  on  the  principle  of  taxing  the  produce 
of  the  land,  shifting  of  the  basis  from  produce  to  selling 
value  may  cause  undue  hardship  on  a  certain  number  of  land- 
owners who  have  not  utilized  or  are  not  in  a  position  to 
utilize  their  land  to  the  best  advantage,  thus  causing  dis- 
turbances in  the  existing  order  of  the  country.  This  objec- 
tion is,  however,  specious.  For  the  present  condition  of  the 
land  tax  system  is  so  chaotic  that  the  reform  introduced, 
whether  based  on  the  old  principle  of  produce  or  that  of  sell- 
ing value,  there  is  bound  to  be  a  certain  amount  of  shifting 
of  burden.  Disturbances  are  apt  to  arise  and  re-adjust- 
ments will  be  necessary  in  either  case.  If  that  is  true  the 
principle  of  selling  value,  which  has  been  found  more  satis- 
factory in  the  other  countries  of  the  world,  is  to  be  preferred. 
Strictly  speaking  there  is  in  fact  little  to  choose  from ;  for, 
in  a  country  like  China,  where  most  of  the  arable  land  is 
under  cultivation,  where  future  economic  prospects  are 
fairly  settled  and  where  land  is  transferred  freely,  the  sell- 
ing value  is  on  the  whole  not  far  from  the  capitalized  yield 
of  the  land. 

Another  objection,  perhaps  a  stronger  one,  that  may  be 
urged  against  the  adoption  of  the  principle  of  selling  value  in 
China  lies  in  the  fact  that  a  fixed  tax  based  on  the  value,  with- 
out taking  the  produce  of  the  land  into  consideration,  inflicts 
undue  burden  on  the  small  farmers  in  case  of  failure  of 
crops,  an  experience  which  occurs  frequently  in  China. 
This  objection  may  however  be  met  by  instituting  a  system 
of  tax  remission  and  postponement.  In  fact,  such  a  system 


THE  LAND  TAX  REFORM  169 

has  been  in  existence  for  many  centuries.  Under  the  laws  of 
the  Republic  the  district  magistrates  are  required  to  report 
to  the  central  government  when  the  crops  in  any  locality 
within  his  district  fail  and  with  the  approval  of  the  central 
government  the  landowners  may  claim  postponement  of 
the  tax  from  seven  to  ten  per  cent  according  to  the  degree 
O'f  the  damages  to  the  crop.1  Such  arrears  are  payable  from 
one  to  three  years  later  according  to  the  amount  postponed. 
Under  special  circumstances  the  amount  may  also  be  remitted 
either  in  whole  or  in  part.  With  some  such  system  as  this  the 
taxation  of  the  land  according  to  its  value  should  cause  the 
small  owners  no  difficulty. 

Having  determined  upon  the  basis  of  the  tax,  the  next 
question  is  to  inquire  whether  in  reforming  the  system  of 
land  tax  in  China  the  tax  should  be  imposed  on  the  bare 
value  of  the  land  or  on  the  land  value  plus  the  improvements 
attached  to  it.  Professor  Willougby  in  his  Memorandum 
advocates  the  adoption  of  the  former  principle,  namely, 
that  tax  should  be  assessed  on  the  pure  value  of  the  land 
excluding  improvements.  He  bases  his  recommendation, 
first  on  the  ground  that  land  is  largely  a  gift  of  nature 
and  only  in  part  has  it  been  made  valuable  through  indi- 
vidual labor,  and  that  the  community  in  general  should 
share  in  the  value  which  it  has  created.  He  also  points 
out  that  "  the  taxation  of  improvements  means  the  plac- 
ing of  a  penalty  upon  the  production  of  wealth  in  this 
form "  and  that  such  a  tax  may  act  as  a  deterrent  to 
the  making  of  such  improvements.*  He  maintains  further 
the  problem  of  assessment  (which  is  the  most  difficult  part 
of  the  wrhole  problem  of  establishing  a  land  tax)  would  be 
greatly  simplified  if  the  tax  be  determined  according  to  the 

1  Finance  of  the  Republic,  vol.  i,  pp.  283-288. 
*  Far  Eastern  Review,  vol.  xiii,  no.  6,  p.  215. 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [438' 

land  value  only,  exempting  buildings  and  other  improve- 
ments from  taxation.  Simplification  of  administration 
should  be  a  deciding  factor,  Professor  Willougby  contends, 
in  the  case  of  China. 

It  is  doubtful,  however,  whether  exemption  of  improve- 
ments will  necessarily  simplify  the  process  of  valuation.  It 
may  simplify  valuation  only  where  the  value  of  the  land  is 
distinctly  separated  from  the  value  of  improvements  and 
exemption  of  improvements  in  that  case  may  save  the  work 
of  valuing  them.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  it  will  be  exceed- 
ingly difficult  in  many  cases  to  separate  the  value  of  the 
land  from  that  of  the  improvements.  Exemption  of  im- 
provements will  not  necessarily  make  the  task  of  valuation 
easier. 

On  the  other  hand,  there  are  several  considerations  which 
seem  to  support  the  position  taken  by  Professor  Willoughby, 
although  he  did  not  point  them  out  in  his  Memorandum. 
In  the  first  place,  under  the  present  system,  the  tax  is  prac- 
tically assessed  on  land  values,  for  the  most  important  form 
of  improvements,  namely  houses,  have  never  been  included 
in  the  tax.  It  is  true  that  toward  the  latter  part  of  the  Tsing 
dynasty  several  attempts  were  made  to  introduce  a  separ- 
ate tax  on  houses.  But  such  a  tax  on  houses  as  has  been 
introduced  in  some  provinces  is  really  a  tax  on  business, 
for  it  falls  only  on  houses  used  for  business  purposes,  resi- 
dential buildings  being  exempted.  In  view  of  these  facts, 
it  seems  advisable  to  confine  the  land  tax  as  in  the  past  to 
land  values,  and  to  institute  a  separate  tax  on  houses,  if 
necessary. 

In  the  second  place.  China  is  predominantly  an  agri- 
cultural country.  On  account  of  the  lack  of  statistical  data, 
we  cannot  at  present  ascertain  the  proportion  between  land 
value  and  the  value  of  improvements  in  the  urban  as  com- 
pared with  those  of  the  rural  districts.  It  seems  safe  to  say 


439]  THE  LAND  TAX  REFORM  171 

that  the  value  of  improvements  is  probably  very  small  in 
comparison  with  the  value  of  land.  The  exemption  of  im- 
provements will  therefore  not  bear  with  special  severity  on 
the  rural  districts. 

Lastly,  it  may  be  pointed  out  that  in  the  development  of 
the  country,  improvements  of  all  kinds  on  land  will  have 
to  be  made  in  the  near  future.  The  inclusion  of  such  im- 
provements in  the  land  tax  would  amount  to  a  special  tax: 
on  such  investments  and  may  tend  to  discourage  them. 
On  the  whole,  therefore,  it  seems  desirable,  in  reforming 
the  system  of  the  land  tax,  to  base  the  tax  on  land  values 
only  and  to  exempt  all  improvements. 

Another  fundamental  question  that  must  be  considered 
in  the  reform  of  the  system  has  reference  to  the  preparation 
of  a  cadastral  survey  and  the  compilation  of  a  complete  and 
accurate  tax  roll.  From  what  has  been  said  in  the  fore- 
going pages  it  is  evident  that  the  first  step  in  reforming  the 
system,  after  the  basis  of  the  tax  has  been  decided  upon,  is 
to  compile  a  new  tax  roll.  A  complete  and  accurate  tax  roll 
has  to  be  based  on  a  cadastral  survey.  But  for  a  country  like 
China,  this  is  an  undertaking  which  would  require  many 
years  of  time  and  the  expenditure  of  millions  of  dollars. 
It  would  not  be  necessary,  however,  to  wait  for  the  com- 
pletion of  the  cadastral  survey  before  launching  the  project 
of  reform.  Other  means,  though  less  satisfactory  and  ac- 
curate, may  be  employed  to  compile  a  list  of  the  taxable 
lands  of  the  country,  pending  the  completion  of  the  survey. 

The  last  topic  that  may  be  noted  here  is  the  establish- 
ment of  an  improved  administrative  system.  The  collec- 
tion of  the  tax  has  hitherto  been  entrusted  to  the  district 
magistrates  who  alone  are  held  responsible  for  the  remit- 
tance to  the  government  of  the  amount  of  the  tax  assigned 
to  their  respective  districts.  That  this  system  of  collection 
is  inefficient  and  defective  needs  no  further  proof.  If 


THE  LAND  TAX  IN  CHINA  [440 

any  thorough-going  reform  is  to  be  effected,  the  col- 
lection of  the  tax  must  be  taken  out  of  the  hands  of  the 
district  authorities  and  a  separate  machinery  devised.  It  is 
not  our  purpose  here  to  enter  into  a  discussion  of  the  ad- 
ministrative features  of  the  problem.  Suffice  it  to  point  out 
that  the  reorganization  of  the  administrative  system  of  the 
land  tax  has  been  discussed  in  considerable  detail  by  Pro- 
fessor Willoughby  in  his  Memorandum.  Many  of  his  sug- 
gestions appear  to  be  very  valuable  and  may  well  be 
adopted.  Perhaps  something  may  also  be  learned  from  the 
experience  of  the  salt  gabelle,  the  fiscal  success  of  which, 
since  its  reorganization,  has  been  most  remarkable.  When 
the  land  tax  is  put  on  an  efficient  and  sound  basis,  its  possi- 
bilities as  a  source  of  revenue  will  be  fully  as  great. 


APPENDICES 

APPENDIX  A—  BIBLIOGRAPHY 
STANDARD  WORKS  AND  OFFICIAL  DOCUMENTS 

1.  Cheng  Chiao,  Tung  Chih  (Complete  Records  of  Institutions}. 

2.  Cheng  Chiao,  Tung  Chih  Shieh  Plan  (Continuation  of  Cheng  Chiao'  s 

Complete  Records  of  Institutions). 

3.  Chio  Chih  Chuan  Han  ("Red  Book"  of  China). 

4.  Er  Shih  Sze  Shih   (The  'Twenty-  four  Histories}.    iSee  especially 

chapters  on  finance,  "  Ping-chun-shu,"  "  Shih-ho-chih  "  and  also 
biographies  of  the  great  financiers  and  statesmen. 

5.  Fa  Lin  Ta  Chuan  (Complete  Collection  of  the  Laws  and  Statutes 

of  the  Republic}.    Revised   ed.   Commercial   Press,   Shanghai, 
1915.     Also  the  subsequent  annual  supplements  for  1915,  1916. 

6.  Land  Measurement  in  China,  published  by  the  Bureau  of  Land 

Measurement  in    1915.    For   English  translation   see  National 
Review,  (Shanghai,  Oct.  9-nDec.  15,  1915. 

7.  Principal  Facts  in  Connection  with  Land  Measurement  Through- 

out the  world.    Published  by  the  Bureau  of  Land  Measurement, 


8.  Net  Ko  Kuan  Pao   (Official  Journal  of  the  Imperial  Government 

commonly  known  as  Peking  Gazette}. 

9.  Report  of  the  Ministry  of  Finance  for  the  4th  year  of  the  Republic, 

published  as  a  special  number  of  the  Government  Gazette, 
Nos.  298-326. 

10.  Statistical  Reports   on   Agriculture   and   Commerce,    Ministry    of 

Agriculture  and  Commerce,  1915,  1916,  1917- 

11.  Ta  Tsing  Hsuan-Tung  Sin  Fa  Ling  (Laws,  Regulations  and  Me- 

morials under  Hsuan  Tung},  Shanghai,  1911  (revised  edition). 

12.  Ta  Tsing  Hwei  Tien  (Laws  and  Government  of  Tsing  Dynasty} 

published  by  the  Imperial  Government  of  Tsing  Dynasty,  vols. 
i-iv,  viii-xiii  and  xcv. 

13.  Ta  Tsing  Hwei  Tien  Shih  Li  (Cases  of  the  Laws  and  Government 

of  Tsing  Dynasty}  vols.  clii-ccix. 

14.  Ta  Tsing  Kuan-Hsu  Sin  Fa  Ling   (Laws,  Regulations  and  Me- 

morials under  Kuan  Hsu},  Commercial  Press,  Shanghai,  1908. 

15.  Ta  Tsing  Lu  Li  (The  Code  of  Tsing  Dynasty}  especially  sections 

xc-c  which  contain  the  laws  in  regard  to  land  ownership,  trans- 
fer, etc.  For  a  translation  of  these  sections  see  T.  T.  Meadows, 
Journal  of  the  American  Asiatic  Association,  vol.  i. 

16.  Tsao  Yun  Chuan  Shu  (Complete  Book  of  Grain  Tribute). 

441]  173 


174  APPENDICES  [442 

17.  Tsing  Tiao  Tung  Chih  (Complete  Records  of  the  Institutions  of 

Tsing  Dynasty),  vols.  Ixxxi-xcvi. 

18.  Tsing  Tiao  Tung  Tien  (Institutions  of  Tsing  Dynasty),  vols.  i-xvii. 

19.  Tsing  Tiao  Wen  Hsien  Tung  Kao  (General  Research  on  Institu- 

tions of  Tsing  Dynasty). 

20.  Tu  Yiu,  Tung  Tien  (General  History  of  Institutions). 

21.  Tu   Yiu,  Tung   Tien  Shieh  Plan    (Continuation   of  the  Tu   Yiu's 

General  History  of  Institutions). 

22.  Wen   Hsien    Tung   Kao    (General  Research   on   the   Institutions), 

vols.  i-xii,  xix-xxxi,  xxxix-xlvi,  ccxlvi-cclv. 

23.  Wen  Hsien  Tung  Kao  Shieh  Pian  (Continuation  of  General  Re- 

search on  Institutions). 

TREATISES  AND  ARTICLES 

1.  Bell,  H.  T.  M. :  The  China  Year  Book,  1912,  1913,  1914,  1916. 

2.  Bell,  H.  T.  M. :  "  Land  Tenure  in  China."    China  Review,  vol.  ix. 

3.  Chang  Lian-chia :  Studies  on  the  Taxation  System  of  All  Countries, 

Shanghai,  1907. 

4.  'Chen,  1H.  C. :  Economic  Principles  of  Confucius  and  his  School, 

New  York,  1912. 

5.  Chen,   S.   K. :   System   of  Taxation  in   China  in    Tsing  Dynasty, 

New  York,  1914. 

6.  Chia  Shih  Nieh,  Ming  Kuo  Chai  Chin  Shih  (Finance  of  the  Re- 

public), Shanghai,  Commercial  Press,  1917,  in  2  vols. 

7.  China  Review,  Hongkong,  1846-1000.    Consult  indices. 

8.  Edkins,  J. :   The  Revenue  and   Taxation  of  the  Chinese  Empire, 

Shanghai,  1903. 

9.  Far  Eastern  Review,  consult  indices. 

10.  Hart,  Sir  Robert :  "  Memorandum  on  Land  Tax  Reform."    Mari- 

time Customs  Service,  Special  series  1904. 

11.  Jamieson,  Sir  'George:  Land  Tax  in  the  Province  of  Honan,  Diplo- 

matic and  Consular  Reports,  Miscellaneous  Series,  ho.  641,  1905. 

12.  Jamieson,  Sir  George:  "Land  Tenure  in  China  and  the  Condition 

of  the  Rural  Population."    Journal  of  the  China  Branch  of  the 
Royal  Asiatic  Association,  vol.  xxiii,  pp.  59-174. 

13.  Jamieson,  Sir   George:    "The   Revenue   and   Expenditure   of   the 

Chinese   Empire,"   British   Diplomatic  and    Consular   Reports, 
miscellaneous  series,  no.  415,  1897. 

14.  Jernigan:  China's  Business  Methods  and  Policy,  1907. 

15.  Jernigan,  Thomas  R. :  "  Currency  and  Land  Tenure  in  the  Chinese 

Empire"  in  A   History  of  Banking  of  all  Nations,  vol.   iv, 
PP-  563-570,  1896. 

16.  King,  F.  H. :  Farmers  of  Forty  Centuries. 

17.  Liang  Ch'i-Ch'ao :   "  Financial  Reforms  of   China."     The  Justice, 

Dec.  16,  1912  and  Jan.  i,  1913. 


443]  APPENDICES  175 

18.  Manchester  Guardian:  China  number,  Sept.  21,  191$:  "The  Land 

Tax." 

19.  Martin,  R.  M. :  China,  Political,  Commercial  and  Social.    Chapter 

VI  on  "  Revenue  and  Land  Tax." 

20.  Morse,  H.  B. :  The  Trade  and  Administration  of  China,  London,  1913. 

21.  North  China  Herald  and  North  China  Daily  News.    Consult  indices. 

22.  Parker,  E.  H. :  China:  Her  Diplomacy,  History  and  Commerce,  2nd 

edition,  London,  1917. 

23.  Parker,  E.  H. :  China,  Past  and  Present,  London,  1903. 

24.  Parker,  E.  H. :  "  The  Financial  Capacity  of  China  and  The  Chinese 

Revenue."    Journal  of  the  Asiatic  Association,  vol.  xxx,  pp. 

74-142- 

25.  Parker,  E.  H.:  "The  Methods  of  Revenue  Collection  in  China," 

London  Times,  1806:  Aug.  18,  27;  Sept.  12,  15;  Dec.  31.  Also 
The  Economist,  April  3,  1897. 

26.  Peking  Gazette.    Consult  indices. 

27.  Raveneau:  La  Chine  Economique.    Paris,  1899. 

28.  'Rockhill,  W.  W.:  Inquiry  into  the  Population  of  China,  Wash- 

ington, 1904. 

29.  Ross,  John:    The  Manchus   or   the   Reigning  Dynasty   of   China, 

London,  1891. 

30.  Ung  Yuen  Hsi:  "The  Reform  of  the  Land  Tax."    The  Chinese 

Social  and  Political  Review,  April,  1916. 

31.  Wagel,  Srinivas  R. :  Finance  of  China.  Shanghai,  1913. 

32.  Wei  Yuan :  Board  of  Revenue's  New  Rules  for  Paying  the  Manchu 

Banners. 

33.  Wei  Yuan:   "The  Military  Organization  of   China,  Organization 

of  the  Eight  Banners  and  their  payments,"  translated  into 
(English  by  E.  H.  Parker  in  Journal  of  China  Branch  of  Royal 
Asiatic  Association,  vol.  xxii. 

34.  Williams,    E.    T.:    "Taxation    of    China,"    Quarterly   Journal    of 

Economics,  May,  1912. 

35.  Williams.  S.  W. :  The  Middle  Kingdom,  2  vols.,  New  York,  1907. 

36.  Willoughby,  W.  F. :  "Adjustment  of  the  Financial  Relations  be- 

tween the  'Central,  the  Provincial  and  Local  Bodies."  The 
Chinese  Social  and  Political  Science  Review,  Sept.,  1917. 

37.  Willoughby,  W.  F. :  "  Memorandum  on  the  Reform  of  the  Land 

Tax,"  Far  Eastern  Review,  Nov.  and  Dec.  nos.,  1916;  Jan.  no. 
1917. 

38.  Winston,  A.   P.:   "Chinese  Finance  Under  the  Republic,"   Quar- 

terly Journal  of  Economics,  Aug.  1916. 

39.  Wu  Chuang   Yin :   "Appropriation   of   the  Land   Tax   for   Local 

Purposes."  The  Justice  (Yung  Yen  Pao),  Shanghai,  vol.  \, 
nos.  1-4  (Dec.  i,  1912 — Jan.  16,  1913),  vol.  i,  no.  6  and  no.  8. 


176  APPENDICES  [444 

APPENDIX  B 
UNITS  OF  MEASUREMENT 

1.  Length.     The  legal  unit  of  length  is  the  chih,  which  is 
equal  to  14.1  English  inches. 

10  chun    —  i  chih 
10  chih     —  i  chang 
10  chang  —  i  yin 

2.  Distance.     The  legal  unit  of  distance  is  the  /*,  which  is 
equal  to  1800  chih  (Chinese  feet)  and  is  thus  also  equal 
to  705  yards  or  four-tenths  of  an  English  statute  mile. 

3.  Area.     The  legal  unit  of  area  used  in  the  measurement  of 
land  is  the  mow,  which  is  240  square  bow,  one  bow  being 
equal  to  5  chih.     One  standard  mow  is  therefore  equal  to 
6,000  square  chih  or  approximately  one-sixth  of  an  Eng- 
lish acre. 

4.  Capacity.     The  legal  unit  of  capacity  is  the  sheng,  which 
is  equal  to  31.6  cubic  chun  (Chinese  inches),  or  1.095 
quarts  English.1 

10  kao      —  i  shao 
loshao     —  i  sheng  (1.095  quarts) 
10  sheng  —  I  tou       (1.36  pecks) 
10  tou       —  i  shih     (6.8  bushels) 

5.  Weight.     The  legal  unit  of  weight  is  the  kin,  commonly 
known  as  the  catty,  which  is  defined  by  statute  to  be  equal 
to  one  cubic  chun  of  fine  gold.     The  catty  is  defined  to  be 
equivalent  to  21%   ounces  avoirdupois   by  treaty   with 
Great  Britain.2 

10   li  —  i  fun    (candareen) 

10   fun       —  i  chen  (mace) 
10    chen     —  i  Hang  (tael) 
1 6   Hang     —  i  kin    (catty) 

loo  catties  —  i  tan    (picul,  which  is  equal  to  133% 

pounds  avoirdupois) 

1  Cf.  Williams,  E.  T.,  "  Taxation  of  China,"  in  Quarterly  Journal  of 
Economics,  May,  1912. 

2  Morse,  Trade  and  Administration  of  China,  p.  173. 


4451 


APPENDICES 


177 


APPENDIX  C 
NAMES  AND  EPOCHS  OF  THE  DYNASTIES  IN  CHINA 


Dynasties 

Hsia 

Yin  (Shang) 

Chow 


Interregnum 

Ch'in 

Han 


Epochs  B.C. 
2150-1780 
1780-1100 
1100-249 


248-222 
221-207 
2o8B.C.-22oA.D. 


Epochs  A.D. 
Three  Kingdoms  221-264 


Tsin 


265-419 


Sung 

Ch'i 

Liang 

Ch'en 

Sui 

Tang 


420-478 
479-501 
5Q2-556 
557-588 
589-617 
610-906 


Five  Dynasties     007-960 


Sung 

Liao 

Chen 

Yuan 

Ming 

Tsing 


961-1278 

916-1125 

1115-1228 

1270-1367 

1368-1661 

1662-1911 


Sub-divisions 


1.  West  Chow  about  1100-70 

2.  East  Chow  about  770-249 

a.  Ch'un  Ch'iu  Period,  722-481 

b.  Period  of  the  "Warring  States" 

403-222 


1.  Earlier  Han  or  West  Han,2o8  B.C.-8  A,D. 

2.  Interregnum,  9-23 

3.  Later  Han  or  East  Han,  24-220 

1.  Wei,  221-264 

2.  Chu  or  Chu  Han,  221-263 

3.  Wu,  221-279 

1.  West  Tsin,  265-316 

2.  East  Tsin,  317-419 

(East  Tsin,  Sung,  Ch'i,  Liang  and 
Ch'en  are  called  the  Southern  Dynas- 
ties in  distinction  from  the  Northern 
Dynasties,  which  are  omitted  here.) 


1.  Posterior  Liang,  007-923 

2.  Tang,  924-935 

3.  Chen,    935-946 

4.  Han,     947-950 

5.  Chow,  951-960 

1.  North  Sung,  961-1126 

2.  South  Sung,  1127-1278 


178  APPENDICES  [446 

APPENDIX  D 
REIGNING  PERIODS  OF  THE  EMPERORS  OF  THE  TSING  DYNASTY 

Shun  Chi  1 644- 1 662 

Kang  Hsi  1662-1723 

Yung  Chen  1723-1747 

Chien  Lung  1747-1796 

Chia  Ching  1796-1820 

TaoKwang  1820-1850 

Hsien  Feng  1850-1861 

Tung  Chi  1861-1876 

KwangHsu  1876-1908 

Hsuan  Tung  1 908- 1911 

APPENDIX  E 
THE  RETURNS  OF  THE  LAND  TAX 

During  the  early  years  of  the  Tsing  dynasty  the  land  tax 
was  by  far  the  most  important  source  of  the  government's 
revenue.  In  the  eighth  year  of  Shun-Chi  (1652)  the  land 
tax  yielded  Tls.  21,100,124  and  5,739,420  shih  of  grain  of  all 
kinds ;  the  next  largest  source  of  the  revenue  for  the  same  year 
was  the  salt  tax  which  yielded  Tls.  2,786,8 16.1  In  the  reign 
of  Kang-Hsi  the  customs,  mainly  native,  began  to  become  im- 
portant. For  the  fiftieth  year  (1712)  of  the  reign  when  the 
tax  was  declared  immutable  the  receipt  of  the  land  tax 
amounted  to,  in  round  numbers,  Tls.  28,790,000  and  6,900,000 
shih  of  grain;  and  the  salt  tax  yielded  Tls.  3,370,000  and  the 
customs  Tls.  3,000,000.  By  the  first  year  of  the  reign  of 
Yung-Chen  (1723)  the  receipts  from  the  land  tax  were  in- 
creased to  Tls.  32,000,000  and  4,120,000  shih  of  grain,  the 
total  revenue  for  that  year  being  about  Tls.  40,000,000.  The 
yield  of  the  tax  remained  substantially  the  same  during  the 
eighteenth  and  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century.  But 
after  the  Tai-ping  War  which  inflicted  no  small  devastation  on 

1  Cf.  Finance  of  the  Republic,  vol.  i,  pp.  1-54  passim. 


447]  APPENDICES  179 

the  country,  the  returns  of  the  tax  showed  considerable  de- 
crease. It  was  not  until  the  end  of  the  last  century  that  the 
amount  of  the  yield  reached  the  figure  of  the  early  eighteenth 
century.  For  the  twenty-fifth  year  of  Kwang-Hsu  (1901)  the 
yield  was  about  Tls.  29,000,000,  while  the  expenditure  of  the 
country  reached  the  figure  of  Tls.  200,000,000.  From  that 
time  on  the  return  began  to  show  some  increase,  and  accord- 
ing to  the  budget  of  the  third  year  of  Hsuan-Tung  (1910)  it 
was  estimated  at  about  Tls.  49,000,000.  The  following  table 
shows  the  estimated  receipts  of  the  tax  during  the  last  few 
years  : 

1910  ...  .......  Tls.  49,669,858 

I9H  ..........  $      68,935,862 

1913  ..........  '       82,403,612  1 

I9H  ..........  '       7^137,809 

1916  ..........  '       97,553,513  2 

For  the  year  1916  the  estimated  yield  of  the  land  tax  is  dis- 
tributed among  the  provinces  as  follows  :  3 

Anhwei  ...................  $4,035,619 

Cheling  ...................  1,084,442 

Chekiang  .................  7,712,259 

Chihli  ................  ....  6,070,951 

Fengtien  ..................  3,331,110 

Fukien  ...................  3,163,809 

Honan   ...................  7,700,750 

Hueilangkiang  .............  1,263,701 

Hunan  ....................  3,335,°o6 

Hupeh  .................... 


1  The  figure   for   1912  on   account  of  the  change  of  the   form  of 
government  was  not  compiled. 

2  The  figure  for  1915  on  account  of  the  change  of  budgetary  calendar 
was  not  available. 

3  For  the  same  year  the  estimated  "  ordinary  revenue  "  of  the  gov- 
ernment amounts  to  $426,237,145  of  which  the   land   tax  contributes 
$97,553,513;  the  Salt  Gabelle  $84,771,365  and  the  customs,  $71,320,970. 


180  APPENDICES  [448 

Kansu i,457,452 

Kiangsi 5,397>626 

Kiangsu 11,092,580 

Kwangsi 1,248,000 

Kwangtung 4,4°3,958 

Kweichow  645,044 

Metropolitan  District 434,032 

Shansi 5,949,516 

Shantung 9,5<>2,355 

Shensi 5»793>96; 

Singkiang 1,818,224 

Special  districts 717.369 

Yunnan   1,094,449 

Szechuan 6,866,91 1 


Total $97,553,513 

According  to  the  'Classification  of  the  Ministry  of  Finance 
the  receipts  from  the  land  tax  consist  of  seven  groups.  For 
the  year  1916  they  are  distributed  as  follows : 

1.  Land-capitation  tax  $64,274,409 

2.  Commuted  grain  tax 22,070,775 

3.  Rent  of  public  lands 3,1 19,279 

4.  Receipt  from  sale  of  public  lands  ....  295,431 

5.  Commuted  corvee 606,012 

6.  Additional  rate 2,960,543 

7.  Miscellaneous 4,227,064 


Total  $97,553,513 


VITA 

THE  author  was  born  in  1893  in  Amoy,  Fukien,  China. 
He  was  educated  under  the  old  Chinese  educational  system 
until  he  was  fifteen.  In  1908  he  entered  the  Anglo-Chinese 
College  in  Foochow,  where  he  began  to  study  English  and  the 
sciences.  In  January,  1911,  he  was  admitted  to  the  Tsing 
Hua  College  in  Peking.  Having  passed  a  competitive  ex- 
amination in  Peking  with  the  highest  average  among  all 
competitors,  he  came  to  the  United  States  in  the  summer 
of  1911.  In  the  fall  of  the  same  year  he  entered  the  Uni- 
versity of  Michigan,  remaining  there  for  two  years.  In 
1913  he  transferred  to  Princeton  University  where  he 
studied  economics  under  Professors  Frank  A.  Fetter  and 
Edwin  W.  Kemmerer  and  politics  under  Professors  Henry 
J.  Ford  and  W.  F.  Willoughby.  He  was  graduated  from 
Princeton  in  1915  with  the  degree  of  Litt.  B.  and  was  also 
elected  to  the  Princeton  chapter  of  the  Phi  Beta  Kappa 
Society.  He  came  to  Columbia  for  graduate  work  in  the 
fall  of  1915  receiving  the  A.  M.  degree  in  1916.  He  has 
studied  economics  as  major  under  Professors  Edwin  R. 
A.  Seligman,  Henry  R.  Seager,  Vladimir  Simkhovitch, 
Wesley  C.  Mitchell  and  Robert  E.  Chaddock,  also  attending 
their  seminars,  and  sociology  and  politics  as  minors  under 
Professors  Franklin  H.  Giddings,  Edward  M.  Sait  and 
Charles  A.  Beard. 

181 


.ow,  or 


YC  64965 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


